Spinning a Warrior/Archer

[Duchess_Driver]

Now, before I go on, I KNOW what the book says.... and I have no intention of going to try either.

But, has anybody done it - either accidentally or intentionally?

What is it about the aircraft that means the manufacturer/authorities have said 'no'?

[18greens]

Probably that it would not take the stress of pulling out of the recovery dive too well. Spinning itself is a very low stress manouver.

I did hear of an old bold pilot who tried to spin a warrior intentionally and maintained it just wouldn't. He said it kind of wallowed and then entered a spiral dive.

[blind pew]

Spun the pa28 150 or 180 - can't remember which without any problem except I had to put in full rudder and elevator about 10-15 knots above the stall. Demonstrated it to John Varley on my initial test after he briefed that it wouldn't go past the incipient stage. After a couple of turns he had enough. Used the same technique on a condor and found myself inverted after executing half a flick roll much to my surprise!

[sevenstrokeroll]

first off...if you are spinning any plane you need to have a parachute...unless
the spin is for the express purpose of obtaining a specific certificate, requiring
a spin (the only one is the CFI).

second off, the earlier , non laminar wing, (hershey bar wing) PA28 series
had specific CG and weight requirements and the difference kept you in the
normal or utility catagory...I think (but am doing this from memory of 37 years ago) you could spin this in utility catagory but NOT normal catagory. But I am not sure.


Third...the PA 28 series WARRIOR comes in two flavors, the older one has friese
ailerons, the newer non friese ailerons.

Finally, the Warrior/ARCHER is a delight to fly but actually a bit tought to stall...and we all know that you have to be stalled to spin...IF you try this (and I don't think you should) it will be hard to get into the spin.

the last inch of yoke travel is hard to get unless you pull a bit UP on the yoke as well as back.

Remember too, that you will be at forward CG with just a student and instructor making it even harder to stall/spin.


NOW, if you want to spin a piper, go spin a Tomahawk...now that's a handful!

And if you really want a shocking view, look back at the T tail while stalling or spinning the Tomahawk...ouch a ma gouch!


Go rent a Decathalon for some spins and other akro.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Now, before I go on, I KNOW what the book says.... and I have no intention of going to try either.

But, has anybody done it - either accidentally or intentionally?

What is it about the aircraft that means the manufacturer/authorities have said 'no'?

First of all every single engine Piper (and Cessna) has been spin tested. Part of the Part 23 certification requirements are that the aircraft must recover from a 1 turn spin. The idea being that if you inadvertently get into a spin you would immediately initiate a recovery and therefore the spin should never go past one turn.

So to answer you question; apply the normal antispin controls when the aircraft enters a spin and the airplane will recover. However go past 1 turn and you are a test pilot and there is absolutely no guarantee you can recover as no testing was done during the certification process.

If a manufacturer wishes to certify the aircraft for intentional spinning, then it gets a much more extensive spin test program for spins up to 6 turns. Even for airplanes certified for spinning if you keep the spin going for more then 6 turns you are a test pilot and there is no guarantee the aircraft an be recovered.

Too directly answer the question anyone who gets a taper wing Piper into a spin is either

1) An amazingly incompetent pilot because you would need to seriously abuse such a docile aircraft to get it to spin in the first place, or

2) So seriously stupid to deliberately ignore a clear operating limitation that they do not deserve to hold a pilots license.

[chester2005]

Pre JAR when spinning was on the PPL syllabus, i know PA28 140s were all spun, they are notoriously difficult to get them to spin but if you are aggressive with the rudder input at the stall, they do go.
Standard recovery technique applied and they come out nice and easy.
PA38s are a different kettle of fish though, the T tail is not pleasant to watch and even with recovery technique applied it will continue to spin for almost a full turn before complete recovery, also the PA38 entry is a little vicious, you know when you've just entered a spin, it is a million miles away from the PA28.
Chester:ok:

[Pilot DAR]

Yes, I have, as a part of certification test flying (in the case of the Warrior because of repaired damage which was suspected of possibly affecting handling - It did not).

For most aircraft, spins can be entered by the technique we understand. As Big Pistons correctly points out, all "normal" category singles are required to demonstrate one turn in and one turn out. It DOES NOT, however require that this be done without unusual pilot skill and attention. For a non spin certified aircraft, unusual pilot skill and attention may be required.

The taper wing Warrior spins and recovers very nicely - but don't do it. The main reason being that you probably do not have an accelerometer aboard, and if you are not precise with the resulting dive recovery, you might really need to have one to get you safely out without overspeeding the plane. During certification, the manufacturer demonstrated it would recover, but it was with a practiced pilot, well instrumented aircraft, in controlled conditions, and with the required flight authority.

The most unpleasant aircraft I have spun was a Cessna 206 at the aft C of G limit. I'm pretty sure that Cessna established the aft C of G limit based upon how it came out of a spin.

The biggest I have spun was a Cessna Grand Caravan with and external load. (I practiced many spins in it with no load first!). Forward C of G at gross weight recovery dive got me to 2.8G at Vne several times. My peak rate of descent was 9200 FPM. Video clip here:

I don't know why the video appears twice, but it's the same one first and second...

C208 spin clip.m4v - YouTube

[Sillert,V.I.]

The main reason being that you probably do not have an accelerometer aboard, and if you are not precise with the resulting dive recovery, you might really need to have one to get you safely out without overspeeding the plane.

My own experience of spinning is limited to the PA38, and I remember it was easy enough to go over Vne in that, especially if I was a bit slow to recognise I'd broken the spin.

If the worst happens & you really botch the recovery, what is better; exceeding Vne or busting the g limit? And without a g meter, how do you know when you're pulling too hard?

[Genghis the Engineer]

A question for you DAR - how did you deal with the unrecoverable spin risk in those PA28s. I can guess what I might have done, but won't lead the question.


I will express a strong personal bias however. Don't (deliberately) spin anything without a "get out of gaol" card. Most times that is a jetissonable door and a personal parachute, but a spin chute or a BRS *may* be an acceptable alternative.

Enough people have hit unrecovereable spin modes in supposedly safe and predictable aeroplanes (T67, Bulldog, Tucano....) that spinning without a plan B just strikes me as a totally unnecessary and avoidable risk.

(Okay, I'll admit to having done so a few times myself, but never as PiC, and only out of expediency during a course or checkout.)


DD - I need to come down to Denham again sometime soon and fly your 182, remind me and I'd happily go through how you do spinning certification if you like. But in the meantime, here are the regs:-

Sec. 23.221 Spinning.

(a) Normal category airplanes. A single-engine, normal category
airplane must be able to recover from a one-turn spin or a three-second
spin, whichever takes longer, in not more than one additional turn after
initiation of the first control action for recovery, or demonstrate
compliance with the optional spin resistant requirements of this
section.
(1) The following apply to one turn or three second spins:
(i) For both the flaps-retracted and flaps-extended conditions, the
applicable airspeed limit and positive limit maneuvering load factor
must not be exceeded;
(ii) No control forces or characteristic encountered during the spin
or recovery may adversely affect prompt recovery;
(iii) It must be impossible to obtain unrecoverable spins with any
use of the flight or engine power controls either at the entry into or
during the spin; and
(iv) For the flaps-extended condition, the flaps may be retracted
during the recovery but not before rotation has ceased.
(2) At the applicant's option, the airplane may be demonstrated to
be spin resistant by the following:
(i) During the stall maneuver contained in Sec. 23.201, the pitch
control must be pulled back and held against the stop. Then, using
ailerons and rudders in the proper direction, it must be possible to
maintain wings-level flight within 15 degrees of bank and to roll the
airplane from a 30 degree bank in one direction to a 30 degree bank in
the other direction;
(ii) Reduce the airplane speed using pitch control at a rate of
approximately one knot per second until the pitch control reaches the
stop; then, with the pitch control pulled back and held against the
stop, apply full rudder control in a manner to promote spin entry for a
period of seven seconds or through a 360 degree heading change,
whichever occurs first. If the 360 degree heading change is reached
first, it must have taken no fewer than four seconds. This maneuver must
be performed first
with the ailerons in the neutral position, and then with the ailerons
deflected opposite the direction of turn in the most adverse manner.
Power and airplane configuration must be set in accordance with Sec.
23.201(e) without change during the maneuver. At the end of seven
seconds or a 360 degree heading change, the airplane must respond
immediately and normally to primary flight controls applied to regain
coordinated, unstalled flight without reversal of control effect and
without exceeding the temporary control forces specified by Sec.
23.143(c); and
(iii) Compliance with Sec. Sec. 23.201 and 23.203 must be
demonstrated with the airplane in uncoordinated flight, corresponding to
one ball width displacement on a slip-skid indicator, unless one ball
width displacement cannot be obtained with full rudder, in which case
the demonstration must be with full rudder applied.
(b) Utility category airplanes. A utility category airplane must
meet the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section. In addition, the
requirements of paragraph (c) of this section and Sec. 23.807(b)(7)
must be met if approval for spinning is requested.
(c) Acrobatic category airplanes. An acrobatic category airplane
must meet the spin requirements of paragraph (a) of this section and
Sec. 23.807(b)(6). In addition, the following requirements must be met
in each configuration for which approval for spinning is requested:
(1) The airplane must recover from any point in a spin up to and
including six turns, or any greater number of turns for which
certification is requested, in not more than one and one-half additional
turns after initiation of the first control action for recovery.
However, beyond three turns, the spin may be discontinued if spiral
characteristics appear.
(2) The applicable airspeed limits and limit maneuvering load
factors must not be exceeded. For flaps-extended configurations for
which approval is requested, the flaps must not be retracted during the
recovery.
(3) It must be impossible to obtain unrecoverable spins with any use
of the flight or engine power controls either at the entry into or
during the spin.
(4) There must be no characteristics during the spin (such as
excessive rates of rotation or extreme oscillatory motion) that might
prevent a successful recovery due to disorientation or incapacitation of
the pilot.

So notice the difference in certification requirements between "normal" (not cleared for deliberate spinning, and "acrobatic" (cleared for deliberate spinning). From a workload viewpoint, the acrobatic level clearance is a huge amount of extra testing, cost, and test risk. Many manufacturers simply see no commercial advantage in doing all that extra work.

G

[BEagle]

I've spun the PA28-140 during FI revalidation checks a couple of times. If trimmed to the normal gliding speed and then spun with full aft control column and rudder in the direction of spin, it enters with little problem, but full pro-spin has to be maintained to stop it entering a spiral descent. Recovery is simple enough, but the main difficulty is to recover from the dive without overstressing or exceeding VNE.

Then the CAA came out with a new method for spinning the PA28, the details of which escape me, but it involved trimming to a higher airspeed than I would normally use and a more leisurely spin entry. I flew with a CAA Examiner and we both tried the new CAA method and found it much more difficult to induce and maintain a spin. But the recovery from the dive was very muich more difficult than hitherto, requiring substantial back pressure to recover to straight and level. He announcd that he would be taking things up with his CAA colleagues, but I don't think that he ever did as the new POH requirement was never amended.

Solo spinning was part of the UAS Chipmunk syllabus when I was a student, so one fine day I was sent off to practise a spin for the first time on my own. HASELL checks completed and into the spin. Suddenly a loud thumping and banging noise came from somewhere behind me, so I promptly recovered and flew back to White Waltham thinking that something must have come adrift....

It turned out that the noise I'd heard was the knotted ends of the rear seat straps banging against the rear seat pan - not uncommon, I gather. But it would have been nice to have been forewarned!

I never did get the chance to try again as a solo spinning was removed from the syllabus a few weeks later.

[A and C]

I can't help thinking that all the stuff I see on pprune about the PA38 tail flexing is a bit overblown, as I write this the wing tip of the B738 I am sitting on is moving about three feet up and down in a bit of light chop yet none of you think a 737 wing is likely to depart from the aircraft.

As I have said before on these forums the PA38 has issues with the back end but nothing that can't be managed with good maintenance practices.

[foxmoth]

first off...if you are spinning any plane you need to have a parachute...unless
the spin is for the express purpose of obtaining a specific certificate, requiring
a spin

This might be a good idea to do and a requirement in the USA but not required by the regs in the UK.

As many have pointed out, the straight wing Pa28s are cleared for spinning (at least they were, not flown one for some time now), but like the Cessna were difficult to get into and maintain a true spin, always suspected the Tapered wings are the same, and what has been posted seems to bear this out. If you want to spin then find something that does it properly, a much easier and more pleasant learning experience.

[BigEndBob]

Loads of spinning in 140's during the 70's. Enter with a bit of power, would do a nice barrel roll then enter the spin. Scary experience in Pa38, but we have to watch the warriors and archer. Set up stall in a archer with stall strips, very unusally it drop a wing to about 70 degrees so not that docile.

[M-ONGO]

I can't help thinking that all the stuff I see on PPRuNe about the PA38 tail flexing is a bit overblown, as I write this the wing tip of the B738 I am sitting on is moving about three feet up and down in a bit of light chop yet none of you think a 737 wing is likely to depart from the aircraft.

Hope your not anywhere near Minneapolis!

The PA38 does not deserve the Traumahawk reputation at all. Students should learn spinning as part of SSAT in my opinion.

[sevenstrokeroll]

two things

I've flown the piper pa 38 tomahawk a whole bunch and I think it is a better
trainer than the Cessna 150/152...and while I mentioned the view of the tail
while stalling/spinning, I don't think it is anything but an interesting view.

the enhanced visibility alone of the PA 38 is a huge improvement in the safety factor of training.

and my regulatory comments regarding a parachute are indeed only for FAA/USA jurisdiction.

by the way...FAA can mean Federal Aviation Administration (USA)...or FLEET AIR ARM of the Royal Navy (UK)...now, my location identifier says Fort Sheridan, IL (stands for Illinois, USA...near Chicago)...and I should have PUT USA.

But when Duchess , who asked the question, reports her location as teenage wasteland or something...we really don't have a clue.

[Genghis the Engineer]

But when Duchess , who asked the question, reports her location as teenage wasteland or something...we really don't have a clue.

Knowing Duchess Driver passably well, I can hopefully without breaking any confidences vouch for the fact that HE teaches flying in the South East of England.

G

[Duchess_Driver]

But when Duchess , who asked the question, reports her location as teenage wasteland or something...we really don't have a clue.

And when I wrote the question, I didn't limit the request to a specific authority. Lucky I'd moved on from The Fletcher Memorial Home!

Seriously, thanks for all your responses.

I am aware that the slab 140/180 can be spun in the utilitty category and my current students and I discussed the reasons why the warrior/archer were not. Some interesting replies.

G - any time.... but am touring early June.

Cheer folks

DD (Mr)

[sevenstrokeroll]

sorry duchess....the title threw me as to gender

I flew the Beech Duchess a couple of times...never liked it compared to seminole.

and why do you guys call the wing a SLAB wing? We call it a hershey bar wing out where they are built.

[Genghis the Engineer]

You can't buy Hershey bars in Britain, or at least couldn't until very recently.

G

[Dan Winterland]

I span the PA28-140 on my FI test (at the club where BEagle was the CFI). The book has an entry from the stall, but my examiner mentioned it probably wouldn't enter cleanly with our combined weight (!) so I adopted the Chipmunk entry of applying full rudder at 50 knots shortly followed by full aft control column. It immediately entered a very stable spin which recovered promptly on application of the recovery.

It was the only time I spun the PA28. It doesn't feel robust enough to do it often comfortably.

[taff_lightning]

As an over zelus student pilot I was sent off solo to practice insipient spins in a "long wing" worrier. In my enthusiasm I did what I know now (as an aerobatic instructor) to be an academic spin entry. The ship turned me inverted then the stability took over, gently flipped me back over and went spirel. I have since spun many "slab wing" cherokees and even with a trickle of power and different flap settings I've found that they just don't stay in. 1 rotation at most then spirel.

So in answer to your original question I think it because that don't stay stalled and the ensuing and possibly un diagnosed spiral dive might put you through Vne.

Having now done my fair share of dumm stuff in light A/C I also strongly agree with the chap/chapess who said don't spin anything unless the ship is cleared and you have a chute.

[sevenstrokeroll]

genghis the engineer

thank you for telling me that you couldn't get hershey bars in England till recently.

NOW that is information!!!

With all the World War 2 movies I've seen, the Americans were always handing out Hershey bars all over Europe. Even in the post war era, they were dropping
Hershey Bars to children during the Berlin Airlift.

I would have thought all of Europe would have been addicted to hershey bars!

[Dan Winterland]

No. Compared with Cadburys, they taste like cr@p!

[Genghis the Engineer]

As Dan says, Hershey bars are chemical-laden rubbish.

Next you're in this neck of the woods buy a bar of Cadbury Dairy Milk, (or if you prefer dark chocolate, Bourneville) and reflect on (a) that this is the cheapest popular chocolate in Britain, and (b) Hershey sales in the UK are tiny.

In the war chocolate was rationed, fortunately that has not been the case for some time, so anybody given a choice wouldn't touch a Hershey Bar with a bargepole.


So we generally refer to early model PA28s as either "slab wing" or "plank wing".

G

[astir 8]

The question was asked earlier - quote

"If the worst happens & you really botch the recovery, what is better; exceeding Vne or busting the g limit? And without a g meter, how do you know when you're pulling too hard?"

As I understand it, the chances of very nasty things happening if you exceed VNE by a relatively small amount (look Ma, no wings) are much greater than pulling quite a lot of excess G (look Ma the wings bent a lot but they're still there)

At least that's how it works with gliders

So if you really get yourself into that corner, pull harder.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Broadly I agree.

Certification standards generally work on the basis of nothing really nasty happening until 11% above Vne, or until 50% above the g limit, which in a non-aerobatic light aeroplane is usually 3.8g (so 5.7g).

Although, the couple of times (both on flight test programmes) that I've exceeded either (in one case, both), I've landed and had the aeroplane thoroughly inspected before doing anything further with it. That said, both times, the aeroplane was fine.

G

[Pilot DAR]

A question for you DAR - how did you deal with the unrecoverable spin risk in those PA28s. I can guess what I might have done,

Well I'm going to have to hang my hat on the expectation that a certified aircraft (which is "very experienced" in service) will not be subject to an unrecoverable spin. It is a design requirements that all certified single engine aircraft be able to be recovered from a spin:

"(iii) It must be impossible to obtain unrecoverable spins with any use of the flight or engine power controls either at the entry into or during the spin"

So it's up to me to have the skill - and altitude! - to do it. The Caravan at full aft C of G was the most worrying, but it came out perfectly well.I mitigate risk by working up to the most rigorous spins in stages, observing changed behaviour along the way. If a recovery does not seem to be happening, I'd be adding power, but I have never had to do that.

I was required to show for the "...or engine controls..." portion of the foregoing requirement once in being told by the regulator to enter spins with 75% power on in a Lake Amphibian, which I was testing for an increased power engine. As I expected, against the engine torque, it would not even enter. With the torque, the result was predictably something like a snap roll (even with the slow deceleration entry). I decided that this type of aircraft should not be doing snap rolls, so I did not do it again! It was un-nerving looking forward at the horizon - upside down - with full rudder and nose up applied! It was time to recover right then! It came out very nicely - Lakes spin beautifully, if you do it power off!

nothing really nasty happening until 11% above Vne, or until 50% above the g limit

Yes but.... In each case, you are assured that a certified plane will remain flyable within those limits. However, you are not assured that at G between 100% and 150% you won't have some damage. Up to 110% of Vne, you are not going to hurt the plane, as long as you are very gentle on the controls, and do not hit turbulence. I have seen the wings of a Cessna 180 which were badly wrinkled outboard of the struts as a result of a careless jump pilot spinning it down through a cloud after the jumpers left.

I was faced with this decision (which has to be made very quickly!) in the Caravan spins. I did not have to exceed Vne and 2.8 G (with 3.5 being the limit), but it was looking like I might have to for a moment. I would rather have exceeded Vne a bit, than got to 3.5 or more G. Once at that high load factor, a bit of turbulence could be very bad.

All that said, I do not like spinning planes. I regularly spin spin approved planes for my proficiency, but other than that, I spin only as required for the testing work I do, and then in accordance with an approved test plan, precautions, and no more than I need to to achieve the objective.