Today i got my SPiN TRAINING!

[sternone]

Oh boy, what a feeling. Since nowadays it's not needed anymore to actually spin during your training i kept on asking them if they would give me a lesson on it.

Today a great instructor told me, no problem, up we go. The first full spin in the C152 was amazing, we did 6 fully developped spins during that hour, each with more and more turns until i was completely satifsfied and able to get out of it!

Immediatly after flying normal i had this feeling in the plane that i never felt before.. i felt much better!! I had this idea that i kinda knew the plane much bettter!!

How is it possible that current students aren't supposed to learn about spins anymore ? I totally disagree with that!! Spin lessons should be in any pilot's training!!

If you didn't do spins in your life yet, please get a spin training, you won't regret!!!

[kevmusic]

Agreed 100%, sternone :ok:. When I started training in '81 spin training was mandatory. I loved it too. What is the rational behind the idea of incipient spin recognition and recovery only? Loving the sensation may be irrelevant as to why something should or shouldn't be on the syllabus but surely being taught how to get out of a spin is a good idea?!!

[VFE]

The reason behind teaching spin avoidance as opposed to recovery is that there were a few stupid PPL's going off and entering spins and cleaning themselves (and club aircraft) up in a sad smoking tangled mess.

Personally, as an instructor, I agree with the current syllabus in that slow flight, stall and incipient spin recovery are all far better than spending time teaching someone the cure for what is essentially a mistake. Prevention is far better than cure, right?

So know your pre-stall symptoms: low or decreasing airspeed, possible high nose attitude, sloppy controls, stall warner (you should never have let things get to this stage if you're half awake!), the buffet (oh dear, you really did doze off during training didn't you?) and then, finally, the stall and nose drop/possible wing drop ergo possible spin (there's no helping some people)...

If you want to do things like spins then undergo a basic aerobatics course once you have a few hours under your belt as a PPL holder - the syllabus was changed for a very good reason and deaths following intentional spins have reduced since.

I won't pass my opinion on your instructor, who spent an hour teaching you spin recovery, as this would not be particularly good form from a fellow professional, but if you have any intuition you'll be able to work it out for yourself really.

VFE.

[kevmusic]

Fair-dos, that sounds like good logic, especially when backed by stats.:)

[Fuji Abound]

If you want to do things like spins then undergo a basic aerobatics course once you have a few hours under your belt as a PPL holder - the syllabus was changed for a very good reason because deaths following spins have reduced since.

Agreed.

Add to that the availability of club aircraft suitable for spin training.

However IMO (which is biased) you should go an do so more "advanced" flying after your PPL and if you enjoy it, an aerobatics course. The "advanced" training should include spins, and a host of other things that are beyond the PPL. There are some good schools around that offer this training and some real experts like Ultimate High - you will learn a lot, and its great fun.

You will get more from it once you have done your PPL and the basic skills are in place.

[G-KEST]

With over 50 years and some 9,000 hours instructing I agree with what has been said. A post PPL aerobatic course including full spinning will enhance your handling skills at the right time.

Looking back I would estimate that for an hour logged as Exercise 11 Spinning you actually managed less than a minute in autorotation with the other 59 spent mainly in climbing back up to a reasonable entry height along with the taxi, takeoff, rejoin, approach and landing plus a return to the parking slot. This when the student was almost certainly pre-solo and with between 5 and 15 hours total. For many the terror induced was totally counterproductive.

A fair proportion of students gave up the idea of becoming an aviator at the prospect of having to learn how to spin the aircraft when that was mandatory. Ridiculous when virtually all modern light aircraft will recover from the early stages of any spin by letting go the controls.

Cheers,

Trapper 69
:cool:

[eharding]

Well, damn me - Sternone recounts an aspect of his training which has genuinely given him an insight into the the most interesting aspect of flying - aerobatics - and instantly a bunch of Grumpy Old Instructors jump down his throat.

No bloody wonder so many PPLs give up immediately post grant of license and a year spent paying £300 for a burger an hour's flying away every other weekend.

Sternone mate: suggest you reward yourself; after every 10 hours training of your PPL, book an aeros training sortie in something fruity with an aerobatic instructor, to remind you why you're doing all of this dry-as-dust straight-and-level stuff. :ok:

[kiwi chick]

I certainly didn't read in any of that "a bunch of Grumpy Old Instructors jumping down his throat" - did I miss something?! :bored:

I found it very interesting, as upon reading the first post I couldn't have agreed more, then as I read further through it I totally saw the point that the "grumpies" were making.

I have always thought that spin recovery should be taught at some stage of a pilots flying (I had to do an hour for my C Cat instructor rating) but never really knew in my limited experience quite where that training should fall.

Will be just as interesting to read any more "productive" post that are added. ;)

[G-KEST]

Come off it Ed. The guy had a session of SPIN training, not aerobatics. He really enjoyed it and thats great. If he chooses in future to lengthen the time and cost to achieve his PPL by having a few dual aerobatic sessions then that is fine by me. Others may be on more limited budgets.

As I said before the majority of pilots regard spinning with the same enthusiasm as they would from discovering they were HIV positive. Nothing is likely to alter that unless they choose to enhance their knowledge. Spin avoidance is the only game in town as far as the FAA, CAA and EASA are concerned. It just makes sense.

Those of us whose chosen air sport happens to be aerobatics fully appreciate the satisfaction and heart ache it can bring. This along with a diminishing bank balance. The higher the level the higher the cost but logarithmically.

Mind you I have to say that 20 minutes in our Skybolt is quite the most effective method of turning avgas into adrenaline. Bar none.......!!!!!

Cheers,

Trapper 69
:cool:

[kiwi chick]

the most effective method of turning avgas into adrenaline.

Tis the first time I've heard that saying, brilliant ! :ok:

G-EMMA - Sounds like you're planning a lot of things post PPL! Good on you!

My advice: Slow down, enjoy, & stop to smell the flowers! Bask in the glory of BEING a PPL first, then try all the new stuff as the novelty wears off the old!

Anyone agree?

(BTW: flying a helicopter for the first time - wear lots of deodorant and be prepared for lots of words :mad: you didn't even know you were capable of saying... lol! )

[eharding]

G-EMMA & Kiwi Chick.

Yes, thanks. Milk & Two Sugars please, pets. (...and I *do* have nomex underwear...)

Presumably the concept of teaching spin recovery 'at some stage' would mean the stage before said pilot kills him/herself in a spin accident, which as recent history sadly shows us, can be on your second or third solo.

The fundamental problem is that PPL training is mostly conducted on platforms which are not approved for intentional spinning; and that the FI course seems to generate a culture of fear in new FIs about the whole subject.

(...and is that the same Trapper 69 with 9000 hours who also has a track record of dumping young ladies into rivers from the top wing?)

[kiwi chick]

eharding:

Yes, thanks. Milk & Two Sugars please, pets. (...and I *do* have nomex underwear...)

I'm not sure whether I should be offended and use language that will most likely get me kicked out of this forum... or laugh and say "what a witty man you are"

Advice?

Response to option a) offended: I presume because I have breasts and only 600 hours [and lets face it, I fly a PA28 Warrior for a living, so I'm not a REAL pilot] that I shouldn't really add my opionion to these threads - or is is that another breasted creature and I should save the "morning tea" chit chat for another website such as www.old-had-it-housewives.com?

And G-EMMA - if it is option a) offended - rest assured the majority of the men on this website are more respectful.

Kiwi CHICK and proud of it.

[eharding]

...and option (b)?

[greeners]

Since spinning was removed from the PPL syllabus, we now have two generations of FIs who haven't had to spin beyond demonstrating (a possible minium of) a single spin for their exam. Students, who ineveitably pick up on the preferences and views of the FI - they're all pros right, how can the stude differentiate between the newbie hour builder and the career instructor? - as a result inevitably have a fear of spinning inculcated; 'that way be dragons'.

Its often quoted that spinning was taken out of the PPL syllabus because of the number of accidents, although I've not see any real evidence; my suspicion is that too many people may have been trying to spin in inappropriate aircraft with inappropriate FIs, possibly in inappropriate cirmuctances - the horror stories one hears of deliberate spinning carried out underneath the London TMA, as an example, simply beggars belief.

Spin training in suitable, well maintained aircraft, taught by experienced FIs who have spent a lot of their time teaching spins, is the only safe way to go. I am clearly biased instructing at Ultimate High but we do spend an awful lot of time teaching people specifically on this issue; spins are definitely NOT just an academic exercise, nor are they things that happen soley to aerobatic pilots - there are a whole bunch of environmental issues that cause an upset that may well end up in a spin.

And taking it even further forward, exploring the non-standard spin in an Extra can be hugely beneficial - why does the spin become flat and/or accelerated? In an inverted spin, is the fact that the direction of yaw is opposite to the direction of roll really going to be your lead indicator that the spin is inverted? And which way is outspin aileron if you are inverted? And if you are completely disorientated and find yourself unexpectedly in a spin, how might you figure out the direction of the spin with a broken turn needle? And when might a turn coodinator kill you rather than save your life?

Does everybody reading this need this skills? If you drone through the middle 20% of the flight envelope, ensure that you are always in balance at all times and stay above the Vs for your individual configuration (spins obviously need the combination of stall and yaw) then you may well be ok. Me, I'd rather know that if my aeroplane gets inadvertently put into an extreme UP that may cause a spin if mishandled, that I will rapidly recognise what has happened and will immiediately be able to apply the control recovery actions that gets the aeroplane back to S+L (or climbing) with the absolute minimum in loss of height.

[kiwi chick]

...and option (b)?

You're witty AND fly a Yak-52 - can I have your phone number?!

Nice plane, was introduced to them just recently (as a pax that was allowed to play, not the PIC) and my opionion: VERY cool. :ok:

(G-EMMA - 'fraid you've outdone me there hon!! Best I can do is CPL (A) and (H), lol! Aerody-what? ;) )

[Mark1234]

Spinning.. been there, done that - in gliders (still compulsory). Scared the cr*p out of me as a slightly nervous stude - took me a while to get over it - these days it's part of my new type familiarisation routine: high tow and explore stalling in various manners and the odd spin, get used to the feel, and the reactions of that particular aeroplane. But then gliders spend a lot of time going round in circles near to the stall...

Now I'm training powered, I *will* do spinning. Not looking forward to it I'll confess as these short winged heavy things are far more vicious in departure than I'm used to. But I'll feel more comfortable for having done it. I'll also do aeros - doing that in gliders has done wonders for my confidence and comfort in handling - it's made 'unusual attitudes' if not quite usual, not completely abnormal either!

One thing experience has taught is that stall/spin avoidance is all well and good.. but it's amazing what you can miss when overloaded/otherwise focussed. Kinda hard to miss having entered a spin however, and nice to have recovery actions instinctive.

That said I suspect that the most likely time to pitch the average tin can into a spin is around the base/final turn which is gonna result in a smoking hole no matter what the hands and feet do :(

[kiwi chick]

That said I suspect that the most likely time to pitch the average tin can into a spin is around the base turn which is gonna result in a smoking hole no matter what the hands and feet do

That exact thing happened here a few years ago Mark1234 - interesting reading, CAA Accident report extract:

1. Factual information
1.1 History of the flight
1.1.1 On 21 January 2003, the student pilot had scheduled a solo training sortie with a Paraparaumu-based training organisation. On his arrival at the aerodrome, he discussed the flight with his instructor, particularly with regard to the suitability of the wind conditions for circuit work.
1.1.2 It was agreed that the instructor would accompany the student initially, to confirm that the wind strength was acceptable for the student’s level of experience.
1.1.3 After two circuits using runway 34, the instructor was satisfied that the student was competent to continue on his own, and sent him solo.
1.1.4 The first circuit resulted in a go-around. During the second circuit the aircraft had reached a late downwind position from where it normally would have turned on to base leg, and was next seen in a spin or spiral towards the ground.
1.1.5 The aircraft collided with a wooden power pole at the front of a residential property and continued at a steep angle of descent into the front yard of the property. The pilot was killed in the impact sequence.

Perfect flying conditions but low hour pilot - I'm sure there are plenty of similar accidents?

(Sorry i would have provided link to this but opens as a PDF on webpage, got a bit lost...)

[greeners]

That said I suspect that the most likely time to pitch the average tin can into a spin is around the base/final turn which is gonna result in a smoking hole no matter what the hands and feet do

Spot on, which is why training focussing on accurate real world scenarios (especially including variations on the above) is so pertinent. Being aware of the high danger situations in the first place gives our studes a fighting chance.

Far too many FIs put the stall/spin awareness into a theoretical/academic package rather than work hard to apply it to the real world, resulting in occassional horrific cries like "I can't possibly have stalled, I haven't done my HASELL checks"....

[kiwi chick]

"I can't possibly have stalled, I haven't done my HASELL checks"....
Touche Greeners.

Bloody well said.

[Zulu Alpha]

Beware, eharding is a skygod with a Pitts, Yak 52 and gazillions of hours.
He is also able to polish off 20oz steaks with all the trimmings in the middle of an aerobatic contest...yes, I have actually seen him do this with my own eyes!! .....but back to the subject:
I do think there is great merit in getting some experience on what an aircraft feels like at the edge of its envelope and not just spins. Generally I don't have time to calculate the amount of G I am allowed in an x degree banked turn at y airspeed. I feel it via the controls. I also think that 1 hr in a PPL course isn't sufficient, hence the need to stay well away from the edge of the envelope during and after a basic PPL course.
I would encourage new pilots to take at least a few hours aerobatic course in an aerobatic aircraft, not just a quick spin or two in a basic trainer. Even if they never do aerobatics again I'm sure it will improve their straight and level flying significantly.

[greeners]

Been an interest thread, certainly made my mind up that I will do some aeros after the PPL.

And good for you! One of the brilliant things about this forum is trying to help to point people in the right direction. There is, of course, a very large amount of blah spouted here every now and then - just occassionally, mind ;) - but it really does operate as a genuine resource for people in the flying community.

[Zulu Alpha]

Ed is actually a very nice chap.
I'll let him reply re the spare seat but he's at White Waltham and thats lots of litres away from Essex in a YAK. However, if you were to be near White Waltham...then that might be different.
I had 30 mins in a YAK52 once...great fun

[kiwi chick]

We've got a formation team here of Yak52s...

7 formation at Easter airshow, 9 formation at airshow in January.

Brilliant would be an understatement - even the old military boys were heard to pay vast compliments. :ok:

(and no, I'm not a Yak wife, lol!)

[Whirlybird]

I did a couple of sessions of spin recovery training some time after getting my PPL(A). I absolutely hated it! I felt extremely ill both times...hence splitting it into two sessions. I hadn't been airsick for ages, but spinning did it! By the end of the second session I wasn't nervous, was quite relaxed, thought it ought to be fun, but still felt too ill to do any more. And they were short sessions!

I'm very glad I did it, just in case I ever need to use it in earnest some day. And I'm glad some of you enjoy it. And it's a great idea that everyone have a go. But after my experience, I'm not so sure that putting it back in the PPL syllabus is a great idea. I'm probably not unique, and do we really want to put off more potential pilots than give up already?

[Final 3 Greens]

eharding
Presumably the concept of teaching spin recovery 'at some stage' would mean the stage before said pilot kills him/herself in a spin accident, which as recent history sadly shows us, can be on your second or third solo.

Wrong example to support your argument I am afraid. Not commenting on your view, just on the inappropriateness of the Southend accident in the context of spin recovery training.

[slim_slag]

Hard to comment really without knowing the instructor, could be very experienced. Could also have been an aerobat which is OK to do spins. What's the harm in an experienced instructor taking a student up in a proper airplane for a bit of a laugh? Primary training can become a bit of a drag sometimes, take a lesson out and do some gentle aerobatics and let the instructor show off a bit :)

What is dodgy are flying schools who do spin training with the wrong instructor and the wrong aircraft. If you are going to do it, then do it properly.

[G-KEST]

Ed -
Track record seems to mean multiple occasions. Once only I fear.

The mark of a good pilot is to have the number of landings equal the number of takeoffs. I have a deficiency of two, both airshow accidents where the risk factor is infinitely higher than normal flying due to the proximity of the ground. One mid-air and one wire strike with a delicious damsel on the wing. I can do nothing to reduce the number but intend not to increase it.

I have been an airshow pilot for over five decades back to 1955 with some 2,300 public performances. I was a member of the UK aerobatic team in the early 1960's and have won quite a few of the BAeA contests in my time. This along with over 13,000 hours logged in mainly light aeroplanes, balloons and gliders. My track record is there.

One day you just might match it. Though I doubt it.

Enjoy your flying. That is the important thing.

Cheers,

Trapper 69
:cool:

[slim_slag]

F3G, not commenting on your post, just on the general subject.

[VFE]

take a lesson out and do some gentle aerobatics and let the instructor show off a bit
And therein lies the fundamental issue of why this student was probably given an hour of spin recovery at such an early stage in their flight training. The ole die hards will always try to foister this spirit of adventure over common sense with their spoutings about hours building instructors not being adept enough to go spinning until puke is falling out the students earholes but the basic reality is that every instructor is taught by a very experienced instructor who knows more than even the most knowledgable PPL holder will ever know. One of the primary requirements of an instructor is to keep the ego in check - believe me when I say that we'd all sooner be doing spins and low level beat ups of the airfield over straight and level anyday however that's not what we're being paid to do.

We could sit and argue all day on the merits of certain execises in the PPL syllabus but within 45 hours of minimum instruction there's plenty of other safety critical factors besides recovery from a spin which must be covered fully. The reality here is that some people who've been flying for lord knows how long forget just how much needs to be understood by the PPL student during training, indeed it's not as easy as it was 20 years ago for many reasons. Therefore, keeping the adrenalin tap closed until the basics are understood is the safest way forward until they're past that first hurdle of obtaining their PPL. It may seem boring but give me boring and safe over exciting and dangerous anyday. What you the PPL holder does once you've passed your test is your decision and my suggestion is that advanced aeros or basic aeros will make you a better pilot. But first you need to walk before you can run.

Oh, and this to whoever said straight and level is boring - it is actually one of the fundamental building blocks of flying. A full hour on straight and level is just as important as any exercise! I know some instructors may whizz through it but take it from someone more experienced in flight instruction than myself - it is very, very important.

VFE.

[Final 3 Greens]

it is very, very important.

I agree and was lucky enough to have an instructor who hammered me on flying S&L accurately and of course trimming accurately.

Later on, when I started to fly x-country (post PPL) it made life so much easier to be able to hold a course and altitude easily, thus allowing more time for look out and nav.

I am grateful for being hammered in the PPL course.

[LowNSlow]

I deliberatly asked for an hour of spinning when I was half way through my PPL. For me it was a bete noir and I had decided that if I didn't like it I was going to stop learning to fly. The instructor was a very experienced chap and he dragged the 150 up to 6,000' to start the spins. Fortunately I loved it and continued with the PPL.
I tend to agree with the people who advocate spin recognition and avoidance in the PPL and I also think that it pays a newly minted PPL to consolidate their training for a while after the PPL before doing a basic aerobatics course, IMC etc to maintain the interest and expand their skills

[VFE]

For me it was a bete noir and I had decided that if I didn't like it I was going to stop learning to fly.

May I ask why?

VFE.

[Mikehotel152]

I paid for an hour in a Firefly with an FI to do spinning after about 10 hours of my PPL and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I felt safer in the air thereafter knowing that I could recover from a spin quite easily.

That said, I don't think that spinning training is an essential part of the PPL, but I certainly wouldn't mind if it were.

Solo students should not be allowed to do it, of course!!! They should concentrate on flying S&L within their experience envelope.

[slim_slag]

VFE,

Do you think the original poster should find another instructor?

[Fuji Abound]

Those in favour of pre PPL spin training ask yourself this.

Newly minted PPLs, if they are going to “inadvertently” spin, are most likely to do so in the circuit. That’s what the evidence demonstrates. Realistically, because you have had a spin or even two demonstrated to you at high level, are your chances going to be improved of recovery at 1,000 feet or less, compared with having had someone explain the recovery procedure to you, and more importantly spent the extra time labouring how to avoid spins in the first place or better still, what to do the moment a wing drops? The fact of the matter is at 1,000 feet your chances of recovery are very poor - period.

For the majority, spinning is not within the normal flight envelope. By analogy, it could be argued that you never do multi spin training. However, multis can and will spin if you let them - but they are not cleared to do so. Since most PPLs train on aircraft not cleared to spin, and moreover are more than likely not to fly an aircraft after their training cleared to spin, why teach them how to get out of a problem that should never arise? Take into account, that if the aircraft is not cleared to spin there is no "guarantee" any pilot is capable of recovering. Surely spend all the extra time you have demonstrating how to avoid it in the first place, and in particular explore the incipient spin envelope, without progressing to the developed spin.

The recent accident that was discussed on her in my view amplifies the point. The stall and spin occurred at 700 feet or less. Once the aircraft spun the pilot had very little chance at all of recovery and a couple of demonstrations during his training would not have made the slightest difference. However, at the point the wing dropped through 45 degrees and the aircraft pitched forward he still had an opportunity to prevent the spin.

IMHO to ensure consistent and reliable recovery from a spin takes a little more than an hour and one or two demonstrations and the average person is more ready for this once they have gained their PLL.

Of course that doesnt take away one bit from spinning for some being jolly good fun. Personally, if it is your sort of thing, I see no reason to go and do some spinning at any stage with an instructor, just dont consider it part of your PPL training. However, if you have only got enough money to spend on one extra hour, spend that exploring the envelope immedaitely prior to a spin. It might not be as much fun, but if the purpose is to make you a safer pilot, I know on which I think your money is better spent).

[Fuji Abound]

I felt safer in the air thereafter knowing that I could recover from a spin quite easily.

With respect, you may be deceiving yourself so far as the curcumstances and height at which most newish PPLs "inadvertently" spin :).

[VFE]

I would very much doubt that necessary slim_slag. Obviously the only information we have here is what the original poster typed - hardly gospel is it? And if it were, it's hardly crime of the century. One hopes the poster has the sense to realise that they are not sufficiently trained to bimble off and "give it a go" alone.... such is my concern.... I have every trust that instructor will have installed the importance of not attempting such manouvres without further training but can we be sure the student feels the same way?

It is my opinion that spin recovery training at such an early stage enforces the macho complex which *can* lead to a safety issue at some point, perhaps not too far down the line. That might sound rather fastitidious to the old dog brigade but I'm afraid it is a proven point. If one were to disregard one aspect of flight training safety because one thought ones self above it then you might as well say that about all aspects and rewrite the book yourself because, in effect, you're saying that the system is wrong and that you, the lone man, know much better . It is a brave man who would stand and defend such actions because the history books are littered with those who thought that the rules did not apply to them, some like Sir Douglas Bader made it through with just a couple of legs missing, others were less fortunate...

It all starts with the basics of flight training whether you think they are necessary, inadequate or not and it is my personal opinion that the spin avoidance training is one of the better changes made to the syllabus in recent years. However, I understand the thinking behind learning spin recovery once the student has grasped other more important flight safety aspects first. Let us not forget that a PPL is only the start of a pilots learning, just like a driving licence is for the motorist.

VFE.

[rottenlungs]

@kiwi Chick
The crash at Paraparam also highlighted some shortcoming in the supervisory side of instruction at the aero club conducting the flight. I flew for a few months at that club and the turnover of instructors seemed to lead to a lack of training continuity.
Realistically, stalling a PA-38 at 800agl is unlikely to be recoverable, even with numerous hours of spin training. I agree that learning how to avoid them is time better spent.
Incidentally, I`ve done 2 spins in a 152 and like someone else stated, with about 11 hours to my name at the time it scared the crap out of me! Especially as they were with a somewhat cavalier instructor who begun the spins at about 2800 ft and over open water (I though over ground was best practice where there are more reference features to aid recovery)..
Cheers
James

[Wessex Boy]

I learnt to fly in the mid'80s in Norwich aged 17, I was so hung-over on spin training day that I concentrated more on keeping body and soul together than the training (managed it until I got out and knelt gently in the grass:yuk:)

Mindful of the fact that I needed to feel comfortable with the aircraft I then became 'One of those stupid PPLs' and , against club rules, the first time I was allowed out of the circuit solo took the 150 up to 5000' and did some spins and recoveries until I was happy.

Looking back not a sensible thing to do, especially as a week after passing my GFT my CFI spun one in whilst practicing his airshow routine:sad:

[slim_slag]

I would very much doubt that necessary slim_slagIn that case I'd recommend you remove the final sentence in your post 3.

[VFE]

Post 3 contained only one sentance. Could you point me to the sentance you refer please?

Regards,

VFE.

[slim_slag]

I won't pass my opinion on your instructor, who spent an hour teaching you spin recovery, as this would not be particularly good form from a fellow professional, but if you have any intuition you'll be able to work it out for yourself really. The original poster might take that to mean her instructor isn't very good.

You lost me with the bader stuff

[VFE]

It is all slotting into place now that I see the original poster is female! Would not have been a male instructor perchance? Ignore everything I have said - pulling a bit of crumpet is far more important than a hazy safety issue.... apologies to the instructor for any inference that statement may have implied... I'm sure he just thrilled her with a few spins and then took her out for a drink afterwards. No harm done. http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/smilies/badteeth.gif ;)

VFE.

Disclaimer: VFE accepts no responsiblity for this shamelessly sexist posting.

[foxmoth]

I would agree that removing spinning from the PPL sylabus was not a bad thing - ideally IMHO everyone should do spin training, but many PPL students were so wary of spinning that when they did it they were so terrified that they actually learnt very little and it was effectively ticking the box to say they had done it, it sometimes put people off continuing with the PPL and so was not productive, most of these people though are the type that stay well inside their comfort zone - I would however encourage people who are interested to cover spinning, either during or after their PPLs, properly taught in the right aircraft they should both learn more about how the aircraft handles and gain a respect for spinning that "spin appreciation" will not give and a good instructor should be giving guidance on the advisability of them carrying out solo practice with their level of capability.I would certainly not knock another instructor for expanding someones experience in this way, especially when I do not know much about the circumstances in which it was done. :ouch:

[Final 3 Greens]

You lost me with the bader stuff

Flew a Gamecock, great stick and rudder guy, knew the plane backwards.

Converted to a Bulldog (Bristol) and did an aero manouver at low altitude, which he'd done many times in the Gamecock.

The 'dog bit him and he ended up on tin legs.

[slim_slag]

But what's it got to do with a person who asked to be taken for a spin by her instructor, got taken for a spin by her instructor, and thoroughly enjoyed it? Now she has something to look forward and work towards beyond her PPL, isn't that what we should be encouraging? Two consenting adults with no evidence of any improper tuition. Nobody forced her to go spinning, it 's not on the syllabus, that bit was dragged in by others.

[Fuji Abound]

Two consenting adults with no evidence of any improper tuition.

I agree which is why I said:

Personally, if it is your sort of thing, I see no reason to go and do some spinning at any stage with an instructor, just dont consider it part of your PPL training.

However, perhaps we should be careful NOT to call it tuition.

That implies you are being taught how to spin, and how to recover, when in fact it is usually the case that the instructor is only demonstrating to the student how to spin and how to recover. Not the same thing at all.

[VFE]

The main crux of the point I have been attempting to make (and it appears you are trying desperately to avoid grasping slim_slag) is that, had this instructor demonstrated the recovery followed by the student recovering the aircraft themselves (6 times was it?) then that student *may* (not saying will) think they can enter a spin and recover safely whereas in actual fact they have not undergone a proper course of instruction to do so.

One hour does not qualify. Sorry, but being of average ability it took me many attempts before my instructor deemed me sufficiently qualified to do spins by myself. Cetainly more than one hour. However, I knew more training was to come and didn't naively post on PPRuNE telling the world that I'd undergone my spin training.

Sadly history shows that because of this spin recovery training during their PPL some folks (including the poor non aero-rated instructors themselves I might add!) copped it. I know one instructor now wheelchair bound as a result of a student locking onto the controls during spin recovery training and them smacking into the ground.

The reference to Bader was that rules are there for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men however, as Final 3 Greens said, even the best can be tripped up by the macho complex overriding the basic RAF rule of no low-level aeros. He found out the reason why the hard way (and I might add continued doing so when he got his pilot ticket back, but I digress!) When instructing I (for self preservation purposes) assume everyone to be the fool. Much safer that way.

I think we can at least all admit that whilst fun, even a full hour of spin recovery training is not adequate for completing the manouvre succesfully, especially for a student only a few hours into their PPL. Please re-read the original post and tell me that the student who started this thread does not demonstrate an attitude which says "I have done my spin training.." Indeed the very thread is labelled such! This is what alarmed me initially.

It really is not a clever nor convoluted point many instructors here have tried to make is it? If you don't understand by now then I am afraid my time here is done.

VFE.

[n5296s]

The fact of the matter is at 1,000 feet your chances of recovery are very poor - period.

I'm a bit puzzled by this. The Pitts loses 500 feet in a one-turn spin. That's a whole turn - there is plenty of time to recover. I wouldn't deliberately enter one at 1000' AGL, but if for some hard-to-think-of reason it did happen I wouldn't expect to hit the ground.

fwiw my feeling is that spin training pre-PPL is more dangerous than valuable. But post-PPL, once a pilot has some real experience and feel for flying, say around the 200-300 hour mark, some spin and unusual attitude training is an extremely good idea. There must be a reason why the airlines have their students do this (the ones that train round here anyway), and it's not because they expect people to go and flip their 777s inverted.

n5296s

[Fuji Abound]

I'm a bit puzzled by this.

Hopefully I was careful to raise this in the context of a low time PPL.

In such a scenerio the spin is clearly going to be in circumstances where the pilot was not expecting it, and therefore probably becasue his attention was being distracted by other issues.

My point was he has had no or very little spin "training" (as has been said an hour at best, and maybe only a couple of demonstrations), things go horribly wrong, the plane stalls at 700 feet turning into final, the wing continues to drop in the stalled turn, the noise rapidly pitches forward and the aircraft enters a spin. That is the typical scenario.

As you will know you react to an intentional spin becasue you are intending for it to happen. The actions are already rehearsed by your brain. In fact you even know which way the aircraft will be spinning and whether it is erect or inverted. In a botched aero or in the above scenario you are not expecting the aircraft to spin. Your reaction time starts at best from the moment you realise you are spinning. If you do everything right now you are already a long way behind the game in terms of the time you have, and that is if you react immediately. Would a new pilot do so?

I guess in the States they still do power on stalls. I have always thought this a good idea as it is the other classic scenerio. A go-round, or the pilot realises he is too low on the approach, and in his haste pulls the noise up and stalls, power on. It can be more of a gotcha than the former.

[Slopey]

I guess in the States they still do power on stalls.

I did quite a few power on stalls as part of the JAA PPL out of OBA 18 months ago - are they actually in the PPL syllabus? I've never had an instructor back in the UK ask me to do one in 5-7 hours I've done back here with one. I thought it was quite a valuable exercise at the time.

I heard (no evidence to back this up whatsoever mind!) that when spin recovery formed part of the PPL, around 50-60% of students gave up the training immeadiately after - any truth to that?

[slim_slag]

I guess in the States they still do power on stallsYes, straight ahead and turning. I've only ever accidently stalled when departing at high density altitudes.

What needs to be taught is to watch the airspeed and keep the bank to <20 degrees?Strictly speaking it's watch the angle of attack :). The thing that will kill you is the skidding turn which tends to happen when you realise you are going to shoot through final and you use rudder to tighten the turn. That is a very very risky thing to do, if you drop a wing you are in big trouble.

Nothing wrong with being uncoordinated if you are slipping, in fact it's a skill all PPL students should be able to demonstrate. But again, watch the angle of attack. If your nose is pointing towards the ground you should be fine. If you get to fly something like a supercub you can start your slip abeam the numbers and almost fly sideways to the threshold, round out and plonk it down on the numbers. Perfectly safe, if done properly, and good fun. Controllers like it too, request a short approach when downwind, if it's that sort of towered field.

Just don't skid. That will potentially kill you if close to the ground, doesn't matter if you are the world's greatest spin recovery artist, it spells trouble. Basically, you will not spin if you are co-ordinated at high angles of bank, the reason you limit your bank in a circuit/pattern is to aid visibility. Teaching co-ordinated flight to a student is very important indeed.

Whether spinning is appropriate for the PPL syllabus is an argument that has been going on for decades. There is no proper answer, I would never criticise a qualified instructor in a suitable machine for demonstrating spins and the recovery, and even letting the student do it themselves. Should it be in the syllabus? Probably not, IMO, as long as spin awareness is drummed in. But I'm not too bothered if it was - as long as spin awareness is drummed in.

[Zulu Alpha]

I don't think the issue is being able to get into a spin and get out of it. This will always be marginal if started from 700-800 ft on the base to final turn.

The issue is knowing what it feels like when the aircraft is about to spin and then knowing what to do to stop it from starting the spin.
Pulling a bit harder and using some extra rudder to make sure you don't overshoot the base to final turn will bite. Go up high and have it shown to you properly so that you know how suddenly it happens , what the controls feel like just before and then you will be much better at avoiding it in the future.

Then the biggest risk will be getting addicted to aerobatics!!

I also think that having the instructor show you by just demonstrating doesn't help, you have to do it yourself . This also has the benefit that you will feel much less uncomfortable. Good instructors can sit there and instruct, bad ones just do it for you which isn't anywhere near as much help.

[sternone]

If you refer to the original poster me as a female, eugh... i'm male! Sorry guys!!

I did fully recovered spin myself, but i don't feel that i'm fully 100% trained on the subject, i do feel that if i got into a full developped spin i guess i could recover myself, that's my feeling, but to go solo spinning i would need more training to be safe and sure.

Today i flew again, we did some power on stalls, clean stalls, spin recovery at incipient stage, and simulated stalls/spins in turning final at around 2000ft

Yesterday after the spinning a felt great and flying was much more confident, today i felt a bit weird doing these stall excercices because i tought i would each time go into a full developped spin wich we didn't ofcorse due to the use of the correct recovery technique. But i feel that knowing that you go do the spin is easier than constantly thinking, i COULD get into a spin doing this... i had around 16kts crosswinds during takeoff and the complete flying lesson was really bumpy with winds up to 25kts but i guess that is normall drill in Europe!!

Next lesson i will continue on these excercices but not with the intention of spinning but more recovering.

Today i had another instructor who knew i did the spin training yesterday, i asked him several times in the air, are we going to fully spin ? He said we will see about that, i told him i rather like to know it before, he was i guess a little annoyed by me asking that, so at the end of the flight, i got some other person of the flight school explaining me that if i do the PPL in the 152 the examiner could ask me to do a full spin recovery. (i don't agree with them but didn't felt like arguing a lot today with them)

I guess they mean it very well, but the spin is a very impressive maneuvre, and i'm really happy i did it yesterday, i still believe to be a good pilot you must get the most training as difficult as possible, in the worse possible situations, even if you do have to push your own limits step by step...

I'm also very sure that i would go post-PPL for a real basic aerobatics instruction lessons, with a good aerobatic school. That can't make you a worse pilot.

I have plenty training on how to recover and prevent spins/stalls.

I still think that every pilot should get his spin training!!!!!!

[Mikehotel152]

I have to say that I thoroughly enjoyed my 1 hr of spinning. :)

IMHO experiencing a spin and recovery at any stage of training or experience is not intrinsically bad. To say it is would be like suggesting that learning an emergency stop for a vehicle driving licence is a bad thing because it encourages people to drive too close to the car in front. Perhaps a better analogy is the use of a skid pan in driver training, which is not part of the driving test, but should be IMHO. Let's not open that bag of worms!

I don't for one minute feel I am 'trained' in the art of spinning after an hour in a Firefly and I certainly won't be going up on my own for the purpose of spinning a 152. I do my utmost to avoid getting into a position where I might stall, let alone spin!

I DO NOT fly less carefully because I had that experience and it's nonsense to suggest that people who try spinning at 3500ft are losing sight of the real danger, that is, for example, stalling on turning base to final. To be frank, at 1000ft no PPL is going to recover unless they're lucky.

So, the spinning I did was not 'training' but 'experience' to which I can instinctively turn in the future. A bit like that dodgy experience I had with a crosswind landing, which I am glad I had but which I will not intentionally repeat. :p

When we are spend thousands of pounds training, why on earth is anyone suggesting that an hour spinning is money badly or unnecessarily spent? Personally, I think the PPL is too short!

[G-KEST]

MikeHotel152 said -
"Personally, I think the PPL is too short!"

Well you might think so since its a free country.

However being a somewhat vertically challenged 69 year old NPPL(SSEA) I am NOT in favour of having a specific minimum height or any other physical dimension incorporated into the ANO or any EASA regulation. Same thing applies in the maximum case too. If the cockpit or cabin fits then I insist on wearing it.

Cheers,

Trapper 69
:rolleyes:

PS - I can however think of one or two aircraft types where it would have been much better for my potential longevity prospects had they been too large or indeed too small. I shudder at the memory.

[Final 3 Greens]

I've not found the aoa indicator in me warrior yet

Its there alright. With your background, all you need to do is think about it for a minute or two ;)

In fact, think about what you do when you flare for landing

[VFE]

Oh nooooooooooooo! I feel another stick position/critical angle debate coming on with that posting Final 3 Greens!! http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/smilies/eek.gif

VFE. ;)

[Final 3 Greens]

Aaaggh!

My cunning plan is revealed :E

[Final 3 Greens]

Have you read 'Stick and Rudder' by Langweische?

[slim_slag]

G-EMMA,

If you want to know the basics of why base/final turn spins happen then read my earlier post. Then read around the subject, F3G's suggestion is as good as it gets.

You earlier said (referring to warrior) it will recover from a wing drop with the ailerons in any casewhich is the LAST thing you should do if you use rudder to tighten the turn, then get a wing drop.

You should already be able to take off, fly pattern/circuit then land with the airspeed indicator covered. You are not going to stall on base/final turn if you are coordinated unless you pull a really steep turn, got to be over 60degrees. Your airspeed is well above stall in the configuration you are in, and your nose is pointing down anyway.

For a more technical introduction to aerodynamics you can look at Denker's See How It Flies. http://www.av8n.com/how/ It's a bit deep, but believe me, there are books on aerodynamics out there which claim to be simple and which are incomprehensible.

His musings on skids can be found at
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/snaps.html#toc191

[slim_slag]

G-EMMA,

When you say 'that is not the case' then I think you are arguing. I don't have a problem with that, but you need to be sure of yourself, cos people read this site for advice and you will get corrected :) Go back and read what I said. Just out of interest, what is your background in aerodynamics?

[jamestkirk]

Put this in your pipe and smoke it.http:
[

url]http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=60+turn+spin+in+a+cessna&search=Search[/url]

Its not linking very well but on you tube search 60 turn spin in a cessna.

[Final 3 Greens]

Not read stick & rudder, but will, my main problem at the moment is keeping my background in aerodynamics in a box, it is mostly from the design perspective, and I'm trying to see it all from the pilots view

That's why Stick and Rudder would be a good read for you IMHO - it approaches the subject matter from the pilot's perspective and I think you'll find it easy reading.

I agree with what Slim says about 'feeling' the aircraft, although the most important senses are probably sight and sound - with experience you will learn 'the picture' and associate the sound of the engine with certain RPM settings and the levels of windrush past the wind with airspeeds.

Don't beat yourself up at this stage of your trainnig - sit back and enjoy yourself in the knowledge that you will really start learning to fly after your PPL is issued.

In the meantime, it sounds as if you have a good instructor to learn from and if you can handle a short rough field like Andrewsfield, then you will be in good shape to fly to most places.

In fact, why not try a trip to Fowlmere when you get the chance, its an old RAF/USAAF satellite close to Duxford and the ghosts of Spits and Mustangs still live there - its also the most beautiful grass strip I've ever had the pleasure to operate from, - landing is like sinking gently into satin :ok: Smoother than tarmac.

[Final 3 Greens]

Trouble is most of the explanation in books for the PPL are fudge

Agreed. It makes it harder to understand, doesn't it.

My instructor made me learn met from the CPL syllabus - in fact, it made more sense and was ultimately easier to grasp!

[slim_slag]

No need to bang your head G-EMMA, I put a smiley in there.

One needs to walk before one can run. Purely out of interest, what was your bachelors in?

[Put1992]

I think the fact that it was removed, quite obviously shows that bad things were happening. Now i dont want to do spin training, but i know my instructor will make me do it, as 1. he likes them, 2. he thinks there important, and 3. He wants me to do the best i can, and spin training will prove something. But i feel, that the beggining of an incipient spin can quite easily be avoided with the way a wing drop is treated during stalls, full power, and rudder in the opposite direction.

Matthew

[foxmoth]

but in the Warrior the actual case is that the aileron will remain effective as the wing is designed to stall inboard of the aileron first

Whilst this is true, I would suggest that you do not learn to use this and roll whilst still stalled - this is fine whilst you are flying aircraft such as the warrior but if you then move on to an aircraft where this is not the case you will find it very hard to get out of the habits you have already learnt - and doing it the "correct" way will still work in the Warrior.:}

[Sagey]

I have a few more hours than one at spinning and other aeros and have sometimes been concerned at hearing stories from pre ppl holders being exhilarated by spinning etc - "the instructor did this then that then this and that" - when some of the manoeuvres you can safely recover from by neutralising everything and bracing. I agree with VFE, spend the early hours concentrating on the key skills, straight and level might be less glamourous but learning how to do it properly and not performance flying without a lookout is much more likely to keep you safe than an hour being spun around.

The few hours after the PPL is issued are statistically the most dangerous, if you keep current with what you are taught in the early days there is time to explore more advanced elements of training later.

S

[slim_slag]

well said foxmouth

G-EMMA, lets turn this imaginary argument into a learning experience. You said The big killer on the turn to final must be over bank followed by pulling back too much to keep the nose up?To which the answer is no, but why don't you use your masters knowledge to calculate the actual bank angle when you would stall.

You are in a warrior, have a constant descent from abeam the numbers, speeds and flap settings you would expect at base/final turn. What bank would you stall at if coordinated.

I don't know. Can you calculate it?

[Final 3 Greens]

G-EMMA

but in the Warrior the actual case is that the aileron will remain effective as the wing is designed to stall inboard of the aileron first, by a good margin.

Not beating you up here, but something else for you to think about.
How does the wing stall?

The Warrior has washout that causes a progressive stalling from the inner wing out - does the example you fly have small strips on the inner wing L/E to accentuate this behaviour?

Well anyway, what happens if you allow the progressive stall to continue - do you think that the ailerons will stay effective? What if you add aileron when fully stalled?

Now I'd be the first to say that the tapered wing PA28s are docile aircraft, but if you did manage to lose one I reckon it might bite very hard.

Like you, I have controlled a PA28 with ailerons whilst the wing is partially stalled (under instruction) and it is an informative lesson, but if I did stall one whilst flying by myself, my immediate reaction would be to unload the wing, then sort out the rest - so I agree with Fox.

[VFE]

In fact, why not try a trip to Fowlmere when you get the chance, its an old RAF/USAAF satellite close to Duxford and the ghosts of Spits and Mustangs still live there - its also the most beautiful grass strip I've ever had the pleasure to operate from, - landing is like sinking gently into satin

Or alternatively, just pop down to Bourn and have a nice cuppa tea! :)

VFE.

[Final 3 Greens]

Fact remains that the Warrior will and was designed to recover from a wing down stall with application of aileron.

Fact?

Please provide substantiation for this claim.

[Sagey]

You always use rudder to control a wing drop, seems to me to be a bad habit to get into and rather type specific. I find that people don't get into the habit of using aileron to control a wing drop if in their HASELL they brief in the event of a wing drop, use rudder not aileron.

[Son of the Bottle]

Hmm, getting slightly agitated as I read this lot. F3G is trying to get the point across, but not quite successfully.

The only reason a wing stalls is due to excessive angle of attack. The only remedy for this is to get the damn stick forward. Picking up a dropped wing whether with rudder or aileron is just icing on the cake, and will get you into yet more trouble unless you get the stick forward first.

Safe flying to all.

SoB

(the above does not apply if you're flying under negative g, but if you are, you know that already, don't you?)

[BEagle]

"You always use rudder to control a wing drop"

Not a good idea - and that fable has been removed from standard stall recovery for years now. Because poorly co-ordinated use of rudder in a stalled condition positively invites an incipient spin. Use only sufficient rudder to maintain balance - 'ball in the middle'!

Standard Stall Recovery (with minimum loss of height) is:

1. FULL power and control column centrally forward.

2. When an attitude is reached at which the stall identification ceases, maintain that atttiude.

3. Then (and only then) - level wings and stop descent.

Too often I see (from graduates of lesser schools):

1. An almighty shove to an extreme nose-down attitude.

2. A trickle of power.

3. Coarse use of rudder in an attempt to 'pick up the wing'.

4. Excessive pitching back to the climb attitude, inducing secondary pre-stall buffet.

An incipinet spin is characterised by undemanded roll rate. In such cases, it is normally safe on most types to centralise the control column and wait, then recover from the resulting manoeuvre. In the Bulldog, the first 360 deg of rotation of an incipient spin can be countered this way.

However, fully-devloped spins require the specific-to-type recovery action stated in the POH.

[Final 3 Greens]

c) If that isn't good enough, contact Piper

That is the correct answer, except you are making the assertion and its up to you to produce a reference e.g. POH or official document, that says the Warrior is designed to recover from a wing down stall with aileron.

I'm not doubting that you have seen the demonstration of aileron effectiveness with a partially stalled wing and I am not going to comment on manoeuvres conducted by test pilots, as their flight regime is different to a PPL's normal regime.

I detect a strong sense of dogma in some of your postings and hope that one day you don't die saying as your last words 'it shouldn't have done that.'

I will also continue to restict my turn to finals to 20 degree max whilst watching the airspeed as advised by my 20,000hr instructor

This is very good advice for an 18 hour student and reflects your instructor's considerable experience; It does not mean that exceeding 20 degrees of bank turning final will kill an experienced pilot, though I agree that distraction is always a potential hole in the cheese.

[slim_slag]

"try a 45 degree bank onto finals at 75 knots ias and see what happens"

Not much unless you are pulling back and loading the wing, which is unlikely if your are base to final in a decent.Well spotted Mr Person. It's the fact that you are in a descending turn that makes the answer calculation difficult for the question I originally posed G-EMMA. If in a level turn, there is a handy chart in the warrior handbook that gives stall speeds for different bank angles. You can also work out a level turn angle using a simple force diagram and basic trig. So, yes G-EMMA, bank angle is very relevant to stall speed, and if you read my question you will see why I asked. This was in response to your suggestion that base/final accidents are caused by excessive bank angle followed by stall (now replaced by 'distraction' )

http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m258/slim_slag/proon/WarriorStall.jpg

So the answer to my question would be 'over 60 deg' but I don't have the smarts to calculate it in a descending turn, which was the circumstances of the question I posed. If you are at all coordinated and flying recommended speeds (and that is under 75knts), you are very very unlikely to stall because of excessive bank.

[Final 3 Greens]

Slim

Excellent point.

To back you up, as a rule of thumb, one can add 50% to the stall speed at 60 degrees bank.

I only have an Archer POH to hand, but the clean stall is 55kias and with full flap 49kias.

So at gross weight, clean, 75kias on an Archer is nearly 1.4vs and with full flap is over 1.5vs.

So, in level flight, you would have departed if clean and be flying on the stall at 75kias and 60 degrees of bank, with full flap.

In a descent, with an unloaded wing and in balance, I think you might get away with a 60 degree turn at 75kias, although the only reason I can think of doing one would be taking avoiding action. I hasten that I would not like to have to do this manouevre!

At 45 degrees bank there is a margin, even clean, in level flight and in a descending turn even more - as I said earlier, I'd be more worried about the resultant RoD than stalling.

[G-KEST]

BEagle in post 92 on this thread summed it up exactly. He describes the most efficient technique for minimum height loss recoveries.

As a former FIE for 28 years I can say that such an effective explanation would have got him an exceptional rating on a renewal test.

We should all now belt up and reflect on the wisdom of his words.

Cheers,

Trapper 69
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
:ok:

[Sagey]

BEagle, I wasn't suggesting using rudder to level wings. I was taught to use rudder to prevent any further wing drop and to never use aileron, control column centrally forward at the same time going through to full power (in reality it is setting an attitude that the warning goes off), roll wings level if necessary and when at a safe airspeed set the vy attitude.

S

[Final 3 Greens]

A typical student scenerio might be (so I have been told), overshoot final, bank a little more to make up for it, pull back a little more to maintain height, whilst the speed bleeds off, the load factor increases and the indicated airspeed rapidly decreases to meet the rapidly increasing stall speed. If that is wrong than my instructor is wrong.

Your instructor is not wrong, he is giving you a plausible scenario. Slim is giving you another plausible scenario.

But wait..... in your instructors scenario, why would the Warrior crash?

You say you know for a 'fact' that it is designed to recover from a wing down stall with the use of aileron and the largest height loss quoted in the PA28-181 POH is 350 feet for stall recovery.

So you turn base at 600', stall and recover at 250' - apart from dented pride, what's your problem?

Seems to me that things don't stack up the way you are figuring them out.

by the way, I'm not flaming you, but as Schein says, sometimes the best learning is uncomfortable.

BTW, BEagle's advice is spot on, as you would expect from someone with his background.

I'm trying to help you round your thinking, that's what I do for a day job.

[BEagle]

G-EMMA - please remember that certain aircraft do not exhibit marked wing drop or pitch forward at the stall! Some may buffet, others may not.. The effect you describe in a Warrior is quite common - but you should also have been taught that a high rate of descent in that condition is also a stall identification.

Classically, warnings that you are getting close to the stall are:

IAS low and decreasing
Controls feel ineffective ('mushy')
Attitude is unusually nose high for level flight
Light buffet may be felt

All that is the aeroplane talking to you, saying "Oi! Keep going and I will stall!"

The identification of a fully developed stall is usually:

Wing drop
Pronounced pitch forward
Increased buffet
High rate of descent

All those are the aeroplane saying "Well, I tried to warn you, but you wouldn't listen! Now, RECOVER!"

Those awful artificial stall warners in most light aircraft are usually set at the wrong AoA value - and often don't even work. NEVER rely on them! Other aircraft (such as the Chipmunk) were fitted with wing root 'toblerone' fittings which ensured that the airflow over the tailplane induced pronounced buffet at the stall.

The RAF used to refer to 'signs' and 'symptoms' of the stall. Incorrectly - try teaching a medical student and you'll soon be corrected. I was - which is why I used to annoy CFS by talking about 'warnings' and 'identifications'. And that's what we had in the VC10 - stall warners which rattled and shook the control column as IAS decreased followed by stall identification stick pushers and loud "A-HOOO-GA" klaxons at the stall! All accompanied by lots of vertical bounce, buffet and quiet whimpering from the navigator.

Remember that you're being trained for a SEP Class Rating, not a Cessna 152 Rating or a PA28 Rating. So stalling behaviour will certainly vary between different aircraft!

If you want to see 'classic' stall behaviour, try the Slingsby T67A. Good positive 'g'-break at the stall - and if you were ever tempted to use aileron at the stall before, you won't be after trying it in the T67A! Good aircraft for teaching stalling and incipient spinning - but not much else!

Lastly, really, really do NOT use the rudder during stalling exercises for anything other than maintaining balance!


PS - Thanks for the kind words, Trapper69!

[Final 3 Greens]

G-EMMA

The following quotes from Transport Canada (Stall/Spin awareness feature in October 2003) might interest you

Very few accidental stalls occur from an exaggerated pitch attitude.

The primary cause of an inadvertent spin is one wing exceeding the critical angle of attack while executing a turn with excessive or insufficient rudder, and, to a lesser extent, aileron. In an uncoordinated manoeuvre, the pitot/static instruments, especially the altimeter and airspeed indicator, are unreliable due to the uneven distribution of air pressure over the fuselage. The pilot may not be aware that the critical angle of attack is about to be exceeded until the stall warning device activates. If a stall recovery is not promptly initiated, the aeroplane is more likely to enter an inadvertent spin. The spin that occurs from cross-controlling an aircraft in a skidding turn usually results in rotation in the direction of the rudder being applied, regardless of which wing tip is raised. In a slipping turn, where opposite aileron is held against the rudder, the resultant spin will usually occur in the direction of the applied rudder and opposite the aileron that is being applied.

You might think that the typical low weight training experience means that the Warrior is virtually impossible to stall/spin - but transport Canada's view is clear.

I once inadvertently set the stall warner off on an Archer at 150', as I'd got the rpm set slightly too low and was maintaining the normal landing picture. Being S&L I was able to add power and all was well, but I know from that experience that it can creep up on you. And I was slightly distracted, watching an aircraft ahead on the runway and starting to think about going around.

Also, have you stalled the Warrior with ballast to simulate pax? You are probably flying mostly in or near the utility category - different loadings can have a significant effect on performance.

I am pleased that SS's scenario doesn't apply to your flying, since it is a well known killer of pilots, especially low houred ones ;)
Anyway, hope the above helps.

You are right to focus on the critical angle, but remember in a wing with washout, like the PA28, the progression of the stall will have a part to play in what happens next - mush down or spin.

I've always had a very soft spot for the PA28 - a real lady if treated well.

As an alternative to the T67A, you could try some stalling in a PA38, whcih will also be a good learning experience.

[foxmoth]

I find that people don't get into the habit of using aileron to control a wing drop if in their HASELL they brief in the event of a wing drop, use rudder not aileron.

This is great - except the reason we teach stall recovery is so you can recover when you are not expecting the stall, so you have not of course done HAsell checks!:rolleyes:
(Ideally of course you have learnt enough not to get into this situation - but who lives in an ideal world).

[kiwi chick]

Hey you guys (and gals tho i think G-EMMA yours might be a bit above me ;) ) I think I could get some really good advice from you (and trust me, i'm NOT being smart!!)

I fly a PA-28 160 for my job. Low level (usually around 200ft AGL) photography with the door off always in a constant turn to the right.

I know in THEORY that I should know all the PoF but from what I've read in these posts my knowledge falls way short! (And I'm crapping myself, just quietly, lol!) :{

I normally fly with 10 degrees of flap, around 2000-2100 rpm, at about 85 kias. I'm not experienced enough by far to "know" the plane well but am starting to get a feel for it :rolleyes:

What angle/speed/flap/rpm setting would you suggest for the safest approach to this work?

Let me say again, I AM serious and any input will be greatly appreciated!!! :ok:

[Final 3 Greens]

What angle/speed/flap/rpm setting would you suggest for the safest approach to this work?

Way outside my field of experience Kiwi Chick.

Hopefully someone with more knowledge will be able to help you.

[Fuji Abound]

Hmmm, best bet is tell the photographer he should invest in a good telephoto lens or you will boot him out the door (that isnt there). :)

[LowNSlow]

A belated reply to VFE re: bete noir; I wanted to fly basic aerobatics and had spins locked in my head as being potentially terrifying. Fortunately I found tht they were a lot of fun (from 6,000' anyway).

[Zulu Alpha]

Spins are just as much fun from 2500 ft and inverted spins even more interesting.
Try some aeros and you'll enjoy the spins rather than living in fear of them.
BTW I tried to simulate a base to final turn at 2000 ft. I pulled a bit to hard and ruddered a bit too hard on purpose.
Didn't really get a spin because my reaction was to let go of everything. I did do about 180 degree turn and lost 200-300 ft while I was 30 degrees nose down with wings vertical. My natural reaction is/was to push forward and get off the rudder, however if it hadn't been automatic I would have lost a lot more height, not in a spin but a spiral dive. Worth trying sometime up high to know what the limit feels like...(usual caveats apply, instructor, aerobatic aircraft etc.).

[Fuji Abound]

Remember that you're being trained for a SEP Class Rating
In theory yes, but unless your training included:

Tailwheel,
VP prop,
Turbo,
Undercarriage,
G1000

These are all out (I will ignore pressure as not really relevant).

.. .. .. and if these "types" are out then perhaps it would have been sensible to "type" anything that is known to significantly drop a wing and to enter a spin quickly. At least additional training on such types would seem more relevant that training someone how to woble a prop!

On top of that I would be interested to see your average new PPL fly a YAK for example.

In much the same way as a multi rating, the SEP rating is becoming more of a rating encompassing certain "types" of SEPs but not others.

In the context of this discussion, that is why a new PPL is more out of harms way turning final in the types of SEPs on which he has been taught than in something that might really bite back.

[eharding]

Spins are just as much fun from 2500 ft and inverted spins even more interesting.
Try some aeros and you'll enjoy the spins rather than living in fear of them.


Well, exactly.

Although there was a spin last year that scared the crepe out of me - I think you were there at the time - in fact, it wasn't the spin, it was the split-S immediately afterwards that had the laxative effect - although I was half a mile away from the aircraft, stuffing a pie in my face at the time. Still trying to get his size 12 boot marks off the instrument panel......

[Zulu Alpha]

Oh yes Waterford...didn't see it but everyone has told me about it.
I hear that Top Totty just dived for cover... the sissy, he was supposed to be judging.

Just to explain, spins in a Yak 52 use quite a lot of height. A split S (half roll plus the downward half of a loop) also uses quite a bit of height. Doing one after the other in a YAK 52 uses lots and lots of height...not really a good plan but I suspect the red veil of competition obscured all sense of self preservation.

Ed, Are you offering free rides in the YAK or do we have to pay for fuel?

[eharding]

The correct figure was a roll-off-the-top. The split S was the figure directly below it as drawn on the sequence card - probably a lesson for us all in sequence design. The big lad flying the spin/split S/judge-worrying combo hasn't been back to a competition, which is a bit of a shame, but post Waterford he got himself a 20-something girlfriend (he being a 40-something old git like the rest of us) with a kite-surfing habit, so he's spent the year hurling himself at rocks in Cornwall, and when not doing that he's not been able to answer the phone on account of being otherwise occupied. The git.

Always happy to fly fellow competitors in the tractor....my treat. You can get lunch. The Ivchenko at 82% will burn about £160 of avgas an hour...at lunch I can consume about £190 of the Waltham special's board menu an hour - but I'll skip the soup to leave room for the dessert - your call.

Actually, *very* happy to provide a complementary 52 trip the weekend before the Nationals....in true Terry Thomas fashion, it occurred to me you might just dislocate a shoulder trying the roll the brute....dreadful luck old boy...and then the same for a couple of dozen of others and I might be within a country mile of a gong....some hope :E

[sternone]

Yesterday at my fly school they told me i was moving in the middle of my training to the new sylabus.

I was still following the old sylabus.

Now there is NO SPIN TRAINING ANYMORE !!!

i was the last student of my flying school that had spin training!! Glad i had fun with it!

[Gipsy Queen]

"We should all now belt up and reflect on the wisdom of his words."

I had hoped to avoid entering the fray on this one (far too much time can be devoted to this Prruning business) but an invitation like this is hard to refuse! Beagle's observations are indeed wisdom to be found in a field of muddled and sometimes dangerous thinking - I am reflecting most profoundly . . .

I was interested in the Warrior - never flown one - having seemingly "reverse" washout. Seems like a good idea if it maintains aileron control at lower airspeeds so people are less tempted to whack in a bootfull of rudder at precisely the point that it is not needed.

There has been some drift from the original posting with the muddling of "stall recovery" and "spin recovery". In a properly regulated aircraft, one has nothing to do with the other.:=

GQ