German pilot killed in Polish air show

[gearlever]

German pilot killed in Polish air show (https://www.dw.com/en/german-pilot-killed-in-polish-air-show-tailspin/a-49222572)
RIP

https://youtu.be/bY8riJt44do


Polish air shows victims
- 2011, one pilot
- 2009, two pilots
- 2007, two pilots

Video:
Holy crap, 4 or 5 people only a few meters away....

[pontifex]

Looks like a perfectly normal spin from which he actually recovered but far too late.

[Andrewgr2]

Strange that the rudder does not appear to be hard right for recovery? Pilot incapacitation? There seemed to be plenty of time to recover from the spin.

[The Ancient Geek]

Not a normal spin, more of a spiral dive. Recovery did not start until he got the nose down.
It is very difficult to recover from the flat attitude, the golden rule applies - Nose Down, Full Opposite Rudder.
I would not expect an experienced show pilot to make such a mistake, it certainly looks like some form of incapacitation or maybe a control jam.

[michaelbinary]

Um make your mind up, one minute its a spiral dive then its a flat attitude, you cant be in both at the same time.

[Hotel Tango]

Looks like a perfectly normal spin from which he actually recovered but far too late.

Tbh, I don't see any signs of recovery. The problem is that we don't see what preceded what we see in the clip.

[Channel6]

It's appears ailerons were full deployed?

[The Ancient Geek]

Rotation stops but no visible attempt to pull out of the dive.

[Michael S]

Initial informations state there was a engine cut out during that spin.

[pilotmike]

It's appears ailerons were full deployed?

Yep! One deployed on each wing....

[Fly Aiprt]

Had a look at the video.
It seems a some moment in the spin, the ailerons were in the "left roll" position, which tends to aggravate/flatten a right spin.
Also at low altitude, the rotation rate seems to slow down, then he starts a secondary left spin down to impact.

[Euclideanplane]

At 0:21 in the video, he seems to be flying again, but too late to avoid the water.

[capngrog]

As pointed out in Post #4, I was taught in primary flight training to use opposite rudder and some nose down elevator to recover from a spin and to leave the ailerons alone. It appeared from the video that large aileron deflections, in the direction of the turn, were used, including large "up" elevator (ANU) deflections. This seems just the opposite of what I was taught. I would think that an airshow pilot would know these things, so that raises the question of incapacitation or disorientation. We'll probably never know. Anyway, this pilot apparently loved to fly ... R.I.P.

Cheers,
Grog

[Propsforever]

This Looks like a Flatspin in Power Off Mode to me.

the Controls are a Mix between Pro Spin and Antispin.

The 52 will flatten out with Outspin Aileron immediatly. To perform the Ultimate Flatspin you would then add Power and go Stick fwd.

The Recovery from an Intenional Flatspin ( Power on - Outspin Aileron - Stick Forward - Rudder Inspin (( The Russians call it Superspin)) ) :

Power OFF
Rudder Opposite
Aileron Inspin
Stick full back (Otherwise Airflow over the Rudder is Blocked in a Flatspin)

After 2-3 Revolutions without reaction the Aircraft will bank in the Spin and enter a Normal Spin/Skidding Spiral Dive ( You can hear the Airflow reattach and the ASI will Speed up like crazy)

Then, Aileron Neutral - Stick Forward - Rudder Neutral when Rotation Stops and Recover.

So, everybody seeing Flatspin-Spin-Spiraldive is quite correct, but the Recovery Procedure hasnt been followed in this case. It Looks like the Attempts from Untrained (On YK52) Pilots.
The Pilot was a PPL that owned this AC for over 10yrs.

[Propsforever]

@ Capngrog:

This recovery is Standard in a lot of Countrys, especially in the english speaking World.

Aileron is left in Neutral to prevent Novices from unpleasant Adventures.
Actually Inspin Aileron will give higher Rotation and more Nose down. It also Speeds up recovery. Often used in Competition Precision Spins, to stop on the Point.
Outspin Aileron will usually develop technically a Flatspin, whith a slightly Nose Low Attitude.

Spinning Inverted the Aileron Inputs will have Opposite Effects......

[ShyTorque]

The rudder didn't appear to be applied in the anti-spin direction, it was neutral or if anything there was a small amount of pro-spin applied all the way down.

But a lot of "outspin" aileron did appear to be applied...a very unusual way to try to recover and obviously totally unsuccessful.

[Meester proach]

And not one of the people on the bank dived in to see if they could help ??

[DaveReidUK]

And not one of the people on the bank dived in to see if they could help ??

It's not hard to think of at least half a dozen reasons why they might have thought that wasn't a great idea.

[Fly Aiprt]

As pointed out in Post #4, I was taught in primary flight training to use opposite rudder and some nose down elevator to recover from a spin and to leave the ailerons alone. It appeared from the video that large aileron deflections, in the direction of the turn, were used, including large "up" elevator (ANU) deflections. This seems just the opposite of what I was taught. I would think that an airshow pilot would know these things, so that raises the question of incapacitation or disorientation.

Grog,
The rudder is the primary control to stop a spin, and the elevator position must be so that most of the rudder area is subject to the slipstream.
The elevator nose up or nose down to recover from a spin depends on the configuration of the tail. Some aircraft (most Pitts for instance) require full nose up elevator to quickly stop spinning.

Concerning ailerons, it has been established that ailerons opposite to the spin tend to aggravate/flatten the spin.
If one looks carefully at the video stills, one can notice that the ailerons are in the left roll position, while the airplane is spinning to the right, so this is a case of ailerons aggravating the spin.

In this particular case, the up elevator and left aileron in a right spin are compatible with the instinctive action of a panicky or disoriented pilot.
Like any experienced pilots, display pilots do make mistakes.
Only inexperienced pilots don't think so.

[Hotel Tango]

And not one of the people on the bank dived in to see if they could help ??

Initially I thought the same, but then it occurred to me that the water was flowing pretty fast with perhaps some treacherous currents. A hero could have become another victim!

[ironbutt57]

Not a normal spin, more of a spiral dive. Recovery did not start until he got the nose down.
It is very difficult to recover from the flat attitude, the golden rule applies - Nose Down, Full Opposite Rudder.
I would not expect an experienced show pilot to make such a mistake, it certainly looks like some form of incapacitation or maybe a control jam.

full blown spin...

[Mr747]

youtube.com/watch?v=kUOAAMZrkrs

Slightly different perspective of crash

[AerocatS2A]

I wonder if the odd control inputs were from trying anything and everything after the normal recovery didn’t work?

[A320LGW]

I wonder if the odd control inputs were from trying anything and everything after the normal recovery didn’t work?

If a facebook post from someone who allegedly used to fly these dastardly things is to be believed, the recovery takes time. You need to have a lot of faith in your inputs being the correct ones and then after about 3 more spins only then will you start to see the result.

If you're panicking you'll instantly try something else and then something else ... except nothing else will work

[dash34]

I see flat spin transitioning to normal spin, and thereafter pro-spin controls (out-of-spin aileron, stick back, into-spin rudder) were held for many rotations. Perhaps the pilot didn't believe the flat spin had stopped. The spin finally stops and the aircraft starts to fly near the end but far too low for a recovery. If the pilot was trying to recover from the spin at any point why wouldn't the stick be put forward and the rudder applied out of the spin? Either one of these would stop the spin on most aircraft. The only explanation is that the pilot wanted the spin to continue for some reason. Incapacitation doesn't seem likely, because all three controls would likely not be held pro-spin if, for example, the pilot passed out.

[Propsforever]

A320LGW

A normal Spin will stop immedietly in the Yak52, given correct Load. ( Backseat Payload was appr. 85kg max in the ones i flew. Western Chute is 7kg, russian Chute is 14kg..)

Invertes and Inverted Flatspin stops fine

A Upright Flatspin will take some time to recover in almost every Aircraft. The 52 is there no exception, its a heavy Beast with small Controls.....
But: It Will Recover! You are waiting up to 3 turns waiting for a reaction..... If you try something different, you have to start from A....

[Mac the Knife]

He went into the riverbank almost vertically at over 100 knots.
(K)not survivable. Rescuer will just find a mess of anatomical bits.

Mac

[hat_eater]

Polish air shows victims
- 2011, one pilot
- 2009, two pilots
- 2007, two pilots


I can't believe nobody called out this bull**** framing. Are people who died in Germanwings Flight 9525 crash "victims of German airlines"? Is Germany's own record so spotless as to call out others like that? (hint: it isn't, Michelstadt, 2001 - 1 pilot; Kindel, 2008: 2 spectators dead,10 injured; Lauf-Lillinghof 2010: 1 spectator dead, 20 injured, Erfurt 2012: pilot killed; Eberswalde-Finow 2013: pilot killed doing illegal stunts).

The truth is that accidents during airshows happen more often than during everyday operation for rather obvious reasons, despite everything that has been done to improve safety since the times of Farnborough, Reno and Ramstein. If you know something about rules violations that might have had anything to do with this tragic accident, speak up by all means. But I somehow highly doubt that.

[wonkazoo]

Grog,
The rudder is the primary control to stop a spin, and the elevator position must be so that most of the rudder area is subject to the slipstream.

Yes, to a point. If you watch the video carefully you will see that at no point does the PIC apply full opposite rudder and hold it. In fact the rudder changes places so much it is hard to understand what he was trying to accomplish, but for all the discussion about pro-spin and anti-spin aileron inputs it is a fact that without appropriate opposite yaw provided by the rudder autorotation will not stop. In actual fact this incident is somewhat reminiscent of my own experiences detailed elsewhere on PPRuNe. For whatever reasons the pilot did not apply opposite yaw for any sustained period of time and the autorotation continued as a result until FIT.


[QUOTE]The elevator nose up or nose down to recover from a spin depends on the configuration of the tail. Some aircraft (most Pitts for instance) require full nose up elevator to quickly stop spinning[QUOTE].

I have more than 1300 hours in Pitts S2A, S2B, S1S, S1T and S2S airplanes as well as as ton in similar higher-powered types. If you follow the direction "full nose up elevator to quickly stop spinning" you are going to be in for a long ride. The airplane will quickly mush into a deep stall, the autorotation will be sluggish but sustained, and I am guessing (because I have never tried) that you will not have enough rudder authority to overcome the deep stall the non-flying wing will be in. Normally once you have the aircraft autorotating you unload the airfoil as much as possible to increase rotational velocity and decrease drag. The airplane has enough rudder authority to keep it rotating even with elevator pretty much at neutral or just slightly nose-up. (Aside- if you want to go flat you bring in the power and then actually stuff in nose-down elevator to accelerate the spin if that's your desire for the day's entertainment...) In a normal spin, when you want to stop on a specific heading you release the loaded wings with roughly neutral elevator and kick opposite rudder. As the rotation slows you punch forward stick to fully unload the airfoil to 0G and use ailerons to fine-tune the rotation until you are on-heading and are pointed vertically straight down.

I have exactly 0 hours in any Yak so what I just wrote is not applicable here, other than as it applies to all aircraft types. In any case based on the video evidence it appears that the pilot either did not or could not apply proper anti-spin rudder for a sustained period of time to effectively stop the autorotation. I don't know when Polish authorities release accident reports but this is one I would be interested in seeing someday, especially to see if control continuity was present.

Warm regards,
dce

[4runner]

Yep! One deployed on each wing....

lol.filler...

[sycamore]

Wonka,having read elsewhere of your `exciting`event,it crossed my mind that this looks rather similar; maybe a foot jammed the rudder,or a cable break.Certainly the rudder remained right,or to neutral,but inspin/outspin aileron tried briefly would make no difference.The pitch attitude appeared normal,and not flattish,and elevators fully up.....
Think we will have to wait for the report....sad event...

[Fly Aiprt]

For whatever reasons the pilot did not apply opposite yaw for any sustained period of time and the autorotation continued as a result until FIT.

Agreed.
Yet the airplane finally stopped spinning to the right, but much too low to recover, and even departed to the left.



I have more than 1300 hours in Pitts S2A, S2B, S1S, S1T and S2S airplanes as well as as ton in similar higher-powered types. If you follow the direction "full nose up elevator to quickly stop spinning" you are going to be in for a long ride. The airplane will quickly mush into a deep stall, the autorotation will be sluggish but sustained, and I am guessing (because I have never tried) that you will not have enough rudder authority to overcome the deep stall the non-flying wing will be in

I'll agree that the method you describe in the rest of your message is very close to what we use in advanced aerobatics to stop the spin on-heading and achieve the correct (from the Aresti point of view) vertical attitude.
But we usually don't do full blown multi-turn spins or flat spins in competitions.

Concerning multiturn/flat spin recovery, things are a bit different.
Of course full opposite rudder, and throttle closed.
I can tell you - because I tried - that the "stick aft" recovery technique works in the S2B. I'm talking of spin recovery, so the airplane is already stalled and spinning. And the "stick forward" is not so good an idea.

Of course I'll not suggest you try if you don't feel confident, but yes the technique works.

The following document might be of interest and is in accordance with Eric Müller's "Flight unlimited" chapter on spins.
http://www.sv4.com/Docs/Spins%20in%20the%20pitts%20special.PDF
As an experienced aerobatics pilot, you know spins are an infinite discussion subject among pilots, even those who never do spins^^!

[czarnajama]

gearlever
"Polish air shows victims
- 2011, one pilot
- 2009, two pilots
- 2007, two pilots"

The record of the Toronto Air Show alone is much worse. I saw seven men killed in one crash in 2005. During my time living in Canada, at least two other pilots were killed at that annual CNE event. Spookily, at the time of the Toronto Nimrod crash, which occurred in my "backyard" since I was living on a boat there, I was reading a book about UK military crashes, almost all at air shows or doing a public stunt. Air shows are in general dangerous, since pilots are performing exhibition manouvers in non-routine conditions.

EDIT: The book selected crashes mainly at air shows and the like. That does not mean that most military crashes have been at air shows. The book (IIRC) was: "Crash! Military Aircraft Disasters, Accidents and Incidents", by Andrew Brookes (1991). One which affected me as a child was the 1956 Vulcan crash at Heathrow; that plane had flown over my school in New Zealand, which left a lifelong impression.

[wonkazoo]

And the "stick forward" is not so good an idea.

Of course I'll not suggest you try if you don't feel confident, but yes the technique works.

The following document might be of interest and is in accordance with Eric Müller's "Flight unlimited" chapter on spins.
http://www.sv4.com/Docs/Spins%20in%20the%20pitts%20special.PDF
As an experienced aerobatics pilot, you know spins are an infinite discussion subject among pilots, even those who never do spins^^!

Fly Aiprt- you are disseminating false information that if used could get someone killed. Spins are not either a mystery or an infinite topic. In actual fact deep knowledge and understanding is mandatory for any pilot performing gyroscopic or other hi-energy maneuvers that usually end in one form of autorotation or another. If they are mysterious or "infinite" to someone then that person should carefully consider performing aerobatics without a qualified instructor onboard.

From the document you cite: "Shoving the right rudder pedal to the firewall, I followed with full nose down elevator. After one additional turn, which seemed like an eternity, the aircraft pitched nose down and stopped spinning."
"At the time I mistakenly believed, like so many others, that the most important thing in spin recovery was nose down elevator to break the stall. I did not understand the importance of first applying full opposite rudder... When I tried to recover from the spin described above, I failed to apply full opposite rudder before pushing the stick forward. When I applied full nose down elevator, I accelerated the rotation."

Beggs Muller was basically the first thing we taught student aerobats when introducing them to unusual attitudes and aerobatics. What you describe- full aft stick for an upright spin recovery is simply bananas. Anything further back than a hands-off neutral is going to potentially keep the aircraft in an autorotational state. As I said- you might have enough rudder authority in the Pitts or other custom biplanes to pull it off, but my rather deep experience base indicates that if you try a spin recovery in an S2B with the stick back, and you insist on keeping it there, you will be doing so until you hit the ground. Indeed Beggs goes on in your document to show that "stick back" is the correct technique for an inverted spin... Again quoting the document: "...it could only mean I had entered an inverted right rudder spin. If this were the case the proper recovery would be to apply full left rudder and pull the stick back!"

Beggs goes on to say as he lists reasons that his peers may have died in a spin "maybe they failed to release backpressure, reversing the spin with rudder..."

NOWHERE IN BEGG'S WORK DOES HE EVEN HINT AT AN AFT STICK SPIN RECOVERY FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN AN INVERTED SPIN. Nor would he because as I said above- it's bananas and a sure way to screw you and your airplane into the ground. If you have somehow done this in a B then good for you, but I would not make a habit out of it as such a technique will kill the operator sooner or later.

Because I want these words to resonate I am going to break my rule about blowing my own horn. In 1996 I was the California Unlimited Aerobatic Championship Points Series Runner-up. I have performed at countless airshows and while it has been 20+ years I have won countless IAC competitions at the unlimited level. Among others Vicki Cruze was one of my students and I mentored her though her intermediate and advance days in the Eagle. Thus I am not some guy who likes to go out and do hammerheads in my 7AC for entertainment, and if you choose to ignore my advice here that's fine with me, but if you do please don't say I didn't try!!.

Warm regards,
dce

[Gipsy Queen]

Grog,
The rudder is the primary control to stop a spin, and the elevator position must be so that most of the rudder area is subject to the slipstream.
The elevator nose up or nose down to recover from a spin depends on the configuration of the tail. Some aircraft (most Pitts for instance) require full nose up elevator to quickly stop spinning..

Well, I don't know how many models of Pitts there might be but I have flown a couple, with more than 50 hours in an S2 and found them to respond perfectly well to the standard spin recovery technique .i.e. stick forward (although not a lot is needed) and full opposite rudder - a powerful control on the Pitts. I don't see how the stall would have been eliminated with up elevator.

[DaveReidUK]

I was reading a book about UK military crashes, almost all at air shows or doing a public stunt.

I would seriously question the research that went into reaching that conclusion. Ask for your money back.

[Fly Aiprt]

Fly Aiprt- you are disseminating false information that if used could get someone killed. Spins are not either a mystery or an infinite topic. In actual fact deep knowledge and understanding is mandatory for any pilot performing gyroscopic or other hi-energy maneuvers that usually end in one form of autorotation or another. If they are mysterious or "infinite" to someone then that person should carefully consider performing aerobatics without a qualified instructor onboard.Thank you for responding.
I’d say you're confirming my point : when it comes to spins, strongly opiniated discussions tend to arise ;-)

We agree that concerning the spin mishap, the unfortunate pilot’s actions on the controls are not consistent with what we believe should have been done.
I suppose we’ll also agree that in competition and practice we rarely deal with fully developed spins, and the technique we use is not always the same as what could be advised for fully developed/inadvertent spins.

I’ll just say that although you are a far more successful competitor than I was, I’m an instructor not totally ignorant of things aerobatic.
The coaches that taught me advanced aerobatics were former unlimited world champions, and two of my co-owner buddies with whom we taught ourselves unlimited aerobatics eventually became world champions.
We never had any argument as to how to perform this or that, we thoroughly gathered information and analysed the aerodynamics of any manoeuvre before trying them.
We found that to stop a developed spin one has first to stop the rotation, and an "unblanked" rudder may help.

I’m not trying to convince anyone, just conveying what experience and aerodynamics taught me.

The rule I’ll never break on the internet is, never enter or dwell in, “experts arguments”.
So I’ll leave it here, we are both entitled to what our experience taught us, if we differ, then so be it.

Thanks again for offering your opinion, albeit vehemently expressed ;-)

BTW you’ll have no problem identifying the picture below – maybe you met the author – and discussing its merits or inaccuracies.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1344x591/yv6s_61f36f0db81a56e647d38ef39db295c825c04697.jpg

Best regards

[old,not bold]

As pointed out in Post #4, I was taught in primary flight training to use opposite rudder and some nose down elevator to recover from a spin and to leave the ailerons alone.

So was I, but "stick fully forward" rather than "some nose down elevator". (With the Chipmunk, the number of fatal failed spin recoveries led to trials in the '60s which found that an aerodynamic lock misled pilots into thinking that the stick was fully forward when it wasn't, leading to the spin flattening and becoming unrecoverable. In the words of one of the pilots involved (much later, out of uniform and our Chief Pilot) you needed to "get your boot behind the stick and shove it fully forward", with full opposite rudder as usual. As I recall, spin strakes were then fitted which alleviated the problem.

With a Prentice, on the other hand, I found out by accident that spin strakes achieved little.

My Dad was nearly killed when instructing in Harvards (1941) when a flat spin developed and the aircraft hit the ground in an absolutely flat attitude, still spinning. The student in the front seat died. Dad walked away. 2 years later the Lanc III he was flying back from Munich with no bombs left and half-empty fuel tanks was attacked by a fighter and severely damaged, set on fire, fell into a spin and exploded (ie the fuel tanks exploded) at about 6,000ft. He survived that one, too. Funny old world, isn't it?

[nimbusgb]

At 0:13 the stick looks to be back but the rudder appears to be straight. I can't see any deflection ( if at all ) until just before it goes in.

[Redlands]

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/918x449/screenshot_from_2019_06_18_14_14_46_e86c47283500899306aa45e7 2e2920fe7ce3baa0.jpg

[FullOppositeRudder]

Also at low altitude, the rotation rate seems to slow down, then he starts a secondary left spin down to impact.
... which was probably extremely fortuitous for the people on the bank!

It's hard to give a logical explanation for what what we see here. The control inputs seem to be sometimes pro-spin, sometimes neutral. As mentioned earlier, it might be helpful to see what was in the program immediately prior to this film sequence. Was a spin (and possible late recovery) on the agenda? Or was it a totally unexpected interruption to the planned sequence, the startle factor took over and blocked out the correct recovery procedure until the very last seconds? There appears to have been plenty of time for the correct inputs to be applied. Whatever it was, the tragedy of the event leaves us all with a heavy heart.

[Clay_T]

I watched it frame by frame and the rudder looked to be flopping back and forth. The pilot certainly was not standing on the pedal.
I'm also wondering if the pilot didn't steer away from the bank and into the water at the last moment.

[wonkazoo]

The post two above this shows something that I initially missed. Look at it- can you see what is there staring us all in the face??

Watch the video again- at the beginning of the film sequence the main gear starts deploying to the down position. By the end of the video it is mostly down.

I am now officially curious and am going to break the sequence down frame by frame. The more I see the more I think something failed in a similar fashion to my own personal experience. I'm noodling now on why one would put the gear down in a stabilized spin and haven't come up with anything I'm willing to share yet, but I do have an idea.

Regards,
dce

[dash34]

Thank you for responding.
I’d say you're confirming my point : when it comes to spins, strongly opiniated discussions tend to arise ;-)

We agree that concerning the spin mishap, the unfortunate pilot’s actions on the controls are not consistent with what we believe should have been done.
I suppose we’ll also agree that in competition and practice we rarely deal with fully developed spins, and the technique we use is not always the same as what could be advised for fully developed/inadvertent spins.

I’ll just say that although you are a far more successful competitor than I was, I’m an instructor not totally ignorant of things aerobatic.
The coaches that taught me advanced aerobatics were former unlimited world champions, and two of my co-owner buddies with whom we taught ourselves unlimited aerobatics eventually became world champions.
We never had any argument as to how to perform this or that, we thoroughly gathered information and analysed the aerodynamics of any manoeuvre before trying them.
We found that to stop a developed spin one has first to stop the rotation, and an "unblanked" rudder may help.

I’m not trying to convince anyone, just conveying what experience and aerodynamics taught me.

The rule I’ll never break on the internet is, never enter or dwell in, “experts arguments”.
So I’ll leave it here, we are both entitled to what our experience taught us, if we differ, then so be it.

Thanks again for offering your opinion, albeit vehemently expressed ;-)

BTW you’ll have no problem identifying the picture below – maybe you met the author – and discussing its merits or inaccuracies.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1344x591/yv6s_61f36f0db81a56e647d38ef39db295c825c04697.jpg

Best regards


I have been taught to keep the stick back, apply full opposite rudder, then ease the stick forward to recover. If the aircraft doesn't recover, start again with the stick fully back and repeat.

[4forward8back]

The post two above this shows something that I initially missed. Look at it- can you see what is there staring us all in the face??

Watch the video again- at the beginning of the film sequence the main gear starts deploying to the down position. By the end of the video it is mostly down.

I am now officially curious and am going to break the sequence down frame by frame. The more I see the more I think something failed in a similar fashion to my own personal experience. I'm noodling now on why one would put the gear down in a stabilized spin and haven't come up with anything I'm willing to share yet, but I do have an idea.

Regards,
dce

The landing gear throughout the video and in the still referenced is fully retracted.

The standard '52 is a bit different to most other aircraft in this regard. Even when fully retracted, the landing gear is almost entirely exposed. Great in a wheels up landing! Just jack it up, lower the gear, replace the prop and fly away.

[dash34]

The post two above this shows something that I initially missed. Look at it- can you see what is there staring us all in the face??

Watch the video again- at the beginning of the film sequence the main gear starts deploying to the down position. By the end of the video it is mostly down.

I am now officially curious and am going to break the sequence down frame by frame. The more I see the more I think something failed in a similar fashion to my own personal experience. I'm noodling now on why one would put the gear down in a stabilized spin and haven't come up with anything I'm willing to share yet, but I do have an idea.

Regards,
dce


Seat failed, with the backrest moving backward, and the pilot grabbed the gear lever to try to bring himself upright?

[4forward8back]

Seat failed, with the backrest moving backward, and the pilot grabbed the gear lever to try to bring himself upright?

The seat doesn't move fore-aft in a '52, the pedals do.

That aileron position will certainly have worked against prompt spin recovery. As to why the left aileron is full or near fullly raised....I don't know. The Yak 52 is a brilliant aircraft, though not one terribly forgiving of mishandling.

[wonkazoo]

The landing gear throughout the video and in the still referenced is fully retracted.

The standard '52 is a bit different to most other aircraft in this regard. Even when fully retracted, the landing gear is almost entirely exposed. Great in a wheels up landing! Just jack it up, lower the gear, replace the prop and fly away.

Interesting- I knew it didn't fully disappear but the mains look like they are much lower than they should be. There is clear daylight between the tops of the wheels and the wing. In any case I"ll defer to your expertise here as previously mentioned my Yak 52 experience consists solely of watching them infrequently from the ground. I am going to go look at some images though as my mind still isn't buying what you are suggesting (and is in fact probably true...).

Cheers-
dce

[wonkazoo]

I have been taught to keep the stick back, apply full opposite rudder, then ease the stick forward to recover. If the aircraft doesn't recover, start again with the stick fully back and repeat.

Beggs Muller is probably the best single approach to spin recovery for all types of aircraft out there. It calls for power to idle, application of opposite rudder and, yes, hands off the stick. Typically the stick will move to a position slightly aft of neutral. In a Pitts, in an accelerated flat spin the recovery can take up to three or four turns before the airplane appreciably slows it's rotation.

Different airplanes have different characteristics which revolve around where the horizontal stab and elevator are located, the physical area of both the elevator and the rudder, the pitch coupling of the airplane, the CG and a few dozen other items as well. What is critical amongst all airplanes though is the fact that if you keep the airplane in a fully developed stall, which will happen if you keep the stick back throughout the recovery, all you will accomplish is to reverse the direction of the autorotation. I.E. you will begin spinning in the other direction.

We've wandered rather far off-topic here, but no matter what it remains the case that if you are in an autorotational state you MUST DO two things. 1) You must stop the rotation with adverse yaw, and 2) you must get both wings flying again instead of just the one. Again, as a blanket approach Beggs Muller is the most scientifically and technically proven method for doing this consistently and the one least likely to cause disorientation or confusion. Consider that if you start with the stick buried aft and you inject opposite rudder and you are late releasing the back pressure then the airplane is going to snap to the opposite direction. (Because all that increased rudder effectiveness your pictures so neatly show...) Hence my concern in people offering that stick back is the way to begin a spin recovery.

If you are a competition or airshow pilot you don't need me to tell you squat, you've already figured out how to use power to goose the recovery, or how to cheat the downline by slamming the rudder and then stuffing the nose while using aileron to make it look pretty. Ditto if you are doing gyroscopic figures and you are just having fun, using torque and precession to manipulate the airplane in ways the novices reading this cannot understand. (My personal favorite, and I only had two airplanes that could do this, is a double hammerhead. You hit zero at the top, kick left rudder with full power on, and as the nose comes through the vertical you stuff the stick forward, causing the airplane to turn 360 degrees about it's yaw axis (the nose continues to the left, up through the vertical and back down to a vertical downline), all while in a vertical (and descending) plane. Most bizarre maneuver I ever did, (beacsue it makes no sense and shouldn't be possible!!) and most enjoyable too!!

If you already know stuff like this then you don't need to be reading any of this and you know it. If you don't, and if you are thinking of teaching yourself spins for some bizarre reason, or if you find yourself unexpectedly in a spin then you need to remember just three things. Power Off. Opposite Rudder. Let go of the stick. When rotation stops fly it out of whatever attitude you are in with power as appropriate.

Regards,
dce

[4forward8back]

Interesting- I knew it didn't fully disappear but the mains look like they are much lower than they should be. There is clear daylight between the tops of the wheels and the wing. In any case I"ll defer to your expertise here as previously mentioned my Yak 52 experience consists solely of watching them infrequently from the ground. I am going to go look at some images though as my mind still isn't buying what you are suggesting (and is in fact probably true...).

Cheers-
dce

This should help:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgvxkrNxdf0

I've got a bit of time on type, certainly no expert.

[wonkazoo]

This should help:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgvxkrNxdf0

I've got a bit of time on type, certainly no expert.

You nailed it!!

So much for my brilliant observational skills!!

Thank you for shutting that one down before anyone invested too much time in it!!

Cheers-
dce

[1claudius]

The flat spin recovery in the Yak 52 I was taught by Gennadi Elfimov many years ago was - throttle shut, outspin full rudder and stick fully forward to inspin corner (full inspin aileron)-requiring both hands- as high force needed. Wait till rotation ceases and neutralize controls before negative G. This took a lot of height loss. The flat spin was usually inadvertently entered from a stall turn so I never did them low level. The sensation when flat spinning was strangely comfortable due to the high nose attitude. There are some examples of Gennas' wonderful flying on you tube.

[greeners]

Beggs Muller is probably the best single approach to spin recovery for all types of aircraft out there. It calls for power to idle, application of opposite rudder and, yes, hands off the stick.

Again, as a blanket approach Beggs Muller is the most scientifically and technically proven method for doing this consistently and the one least likely to cause disorientation or confusion.


wonkazoo - you are clearly a very able pilot. However, I have to take issue with your insistence that Beggs Muller is the best 'single' approach. The critical point here is that pilots MUST know the spin recovery techniques for their specific aircraft. Whilst Beggs Muller does indeed work on a variety of types, in some aircraft taking your hands off the stick in a spin will cause it to go high rotational.

Let's have no more talk about 'general' or 'blanket' spin recovery techniques please. Make sure that you know the spin recovery techniques outlined in the POH for YOUR specific aeroplane.

[MightyOneFiveTwo]

Question - I have zero agenda asking this, just curious - in the case of a completely free rudder, i.e. no control continuity at all, no bungee force, no cable or pedal friction, what would that control surface do in a spin? Would it depend on the a/c model and the exact maneuver (I suspect so)? Could it account for the behaviour in the video? Does anyone have any real world data? Wonkazoo, did you happen to have a camera pointed at your tail when your Event happened?
Curious non-aviation control systems engineer wants to know...
Thanks

[ASRAAMTOO]

wonkazoo - you are clearly a very able pilot. However, I have to take issue with your insistence that Beggs Muller is the best 'single' approach. The critical point here is that pilots MUST know the spin recovery techniques for their specific aircraft. Whilst Beggs Muller does indeed work on a variety of types, in some aircraft taking your hands off the stick in a spin will cause it to go high rotational.

Let's have no more talk about 'general' or 'blanket' spin recovery techniques please. Make sure that you know the spin recovery techniques outlined in the POH for YOUR specific aeroplane.

Excellent advice, there are a number of aircraft out there that will either not recover or recover more slowly using that generic technique.

[wonkazoo]

wonkazoo - you are clearly a very able pilot. However, I have to take issue with your insistence that Beggs Muller is the best 'single' approach. The critical point here is that pilots MUST know the spin recovery techniques for their specific aircraft. Whilst Beggs Muller does indeed work on a variety of types, in some aircraft taking your hands off the stick in a spin will cause it to go high rotational.

Let's have no more talk about 'general' or 'blanket' spin recovery techniques please. Make sure that you know the spin recovery techniques outlined in the POH for YOUR specific aeroplane.

The real problem here in the US anyway is that there is no statutory requirement that a prospective pilot ever experience a spin before becoming licensed. This is one reason (I believe) that stall spin accidents in the pattern and elsewhere are still far too common. For the majority of those accidents the pilot keeps the stick buried to the rear, primarily out of fear and inexperience I'm guessing. If the PIC had simply released the back pressure up to the point of autorotation or even in most cases after it they would not have fatally crashed their perfectly good airplane. Everything I have written here is intended primarily for that audience- the one who doesn't know what adverse yaw even looks like, much less a developing spin. For that audience, and perhaps that audience only, keeping the stick back is simply not the right advice and nearly all GA aircraft will fail to recover or will take unduly long to recover if the back pressure on the stick is not released immediately after applying opposite rudder.

Perhaps I was wrong when I offered that spins are not the great unknown- they aren't, but how your aircraft will react when in one or entering one is highly variable, hence this discussion.

Warm regards-
dce

[Raffles S.A.]

Shouldn't ailerons be neutral for a spin recovery? I think he was incapacitated to some extent, confusion, disorientation.

[blind pew]

As someone who very nearly became a statistic in a Condor whilst instructing during the 70s due to being stuck in a spin and whose then pupil died 20 years later in a Christian Eagle its refreshing to read some knowledgeable posts.
I always believed and taught that if you arent sure what the aircraft is doing put everything in the middle which helped in severe turbulence glider flying in the french alps.
re the question of airflow on the rudder..on some early glass gliders, the phoebus being one, the rudder would aerodynamically lock in the fully deflected position when side slipping and need a very hefty boot of rudder (or aileron induced yaw) to unlock it.
What has startled me is some aircraft pitch down through the vertical during recovery.
whilst I've only seriously flown glider aerobatics, model aircraft are a great tool to experiment with especially torque rolls and flat spins. If it goes wrong it only costs a few hundred quid.

[wonkazoo]

Question - I have zero agenda asking this, just curious - in the case of a completely free rudder, i.e. no control continuity at all, no bungee force, no cable or pedal friction, what would that control surface do in a spin? Would it depend on the a/c model and the exact maneuver (I suspect so)? Could it account for the behaviour in the video? Does anyone have any real world data? Wonkazoo, did you happen to have a camera pointed at your tail when your Event happened?
Curious non-aviation control systems engineer wants to know...
Thanks

I'm very sorry, I did not ignore this question on purpose.

No, in 1996 cameras were not everywhere like they are today. I did video in my next airplane, which was a big deal at the time, but as to what my rudder was doing in the Goshawk I can only theorize. The first thing to note is that it basically wasn't doing anything. A rudder, when attached to two fixed points, can exert physical force- hence its existence in the first place. Once my rudder became unattached on the left side it lost the ability to influence airflow and thus control the airplane- it became instead a passive device that was controlled by several exterior forces, namely the relative airflow and any g-loading on the structure.

It was not substantially different than what I see in the video of this most recent tragedy, with the one notable exception that twice in that video he appears to put the rudder hard over to the left. I could not do that- in either direction. Thus it isn't clear to me at this time what happened in this incident, although I have to confess to seeing things similar to what I tried (firm opposite and then in-spin aileron, quick elevator inputs etc) to recover my airplane. In this instance it appears that he did get it out of it's spin. In the second rotation from the last the airplane appears to be more vertical, with aileron controlling the rotation and not yaw. This idea is supported by the sudden bank back to the left, but I am really just guessing here.

At some level what I am seeing here doesn't add up. If he is an experienced aerobatic pilot. (Was actually) then the inputs in the frames that are visible make absolutely no sense. He never lays over hard opposite rudder to stop the spin. That leads one inevitably to: Why not??

Someone else asked in this thread if there was any film of what preceded this sequence and I would love to see it if there is. Was this a spin that just went south, or a maneuver that failed or left him in an unstable auto-rotational state low to the ground?? In any case, and as I've said previously- I am very interested in what they find. I fear if control continuity is present they will rule it CFIT, which would be very unfortunate as it appears to me that there is more going on here than meets the eye.

Warm regards,
dce

[pilotmike]

As someone who very nearly became a statistic in a Condor whilst instructing during the 70s due to being stuck in a spin and whose then pupil died 20 years later in a Christian Eagle its refreshing to read some knowledgeable posts.
I always believed and taught that if you arent sure what the aircraft is doing put everything in the middle...
Scary. Truly scary, and very worrying. Very sad to read.

An instructor who admits to nearly killing themselves and their student because they didn't know the correct procedure for spin recovery, and who therefore couldn't teach it, whose student then goes on to kill themselves...

Nothing makes wonkazoo's point better than this tale of woe and tragedy.

[The Ancient Geek]

Modern pilots have never experienced a spin because it is no longer taught in basic training.
The powers that be decided that there were more deaths in spin training than from accidental spins.

[ASRAAMTOO]

Shouldn't ailerons be neutral for a spin recovery? I think he was incapacitated to some extent, confusion, disorientation.

In a spin recovery ailerons should be positioned as specified in the pilots handbook for that particular aircraft.

For reasons that are quite longwinded to explain, the effect of aileron on a spinning aircraft is dependent upon the relationship between the wing inertia and the fuselage inertia of the aircraft at that moment in time (Often referred to as B/A ratio). For some aircraft there is always a benefit in applying a particular aileron (in or out spin). If so it will say so in the pilots handbook.

Many aircraft however operate in a regime where the B/A ratio is close to the point at which the required antispin aileron may be in or out depending upon things like CofG and fuel load. Since its obviously better to apply NO aileron rather than the WRONG aileron the advice is therefore to leave ailerons neutral for those aircraft.

[FullOppositeRudder]

Spins, (incipient and fully developed) - and of course the recovery therefrom - are mandatory parts of the gliding training syllabus in Australia and probably elsewhere, and AFAIK all pilots down here are required to demonstrate effective recovery from spins as a part of their annual checks . Gliders can spend a lot of their flight regime circling in thermals - not all that much above the stall speed, often at high angles of bank and in varying turbulence. Additionally the correct and constant use of the rudder is essential for efficient turning, so it all has to be closely co-ordinated. While pilots are trained to recognise and correct at the incipient stage until this becomes an automatic and instinctive reaction to the telltale symptoms, it's clearly far better to fly with sufficient accuracy and awareness such that the issue never arises. Happily most / all gliders require very similar control inputs for spin recovery. Spins were fun. I used to do one or two occasionally as part of the rare and privileged 'hangar flight' in the early days when I was young and adventurous, and gliders were much less "slippery" than they are today.

[blind pew]

It wasnt incorrect spin recovery but an idiot who had adjusted up the brakes and restricted the rudder movement. He had been grounded after running out of fuel taxying in after a cross country and took it on his own initiative to illegaly adjust the brakes and not tell anyone. He later became an airline pilot.
My pupil many years later got into modifying pitts to roll faster, I gave him a grand to travel to portugal to see if we could buy the air force chipmunks. He was a big bloke and had served on avaition fuel convoys in the way. His first crash was air testing an aircraft in shoreham after major restoration where the AoA rear spar clevis pins had been left out.
The Christian Eagle crash was an inadvertent spin although the report stated he was doing low level aeros which I don't believe...but who believes all accident reports in their right mind anyway.
my bit about centralising the controls wasnt about spin recovery.

[capngrog]

The Christian Eagle crash was an inadvertent spin although the report stated he was doing low level aeros which I don't believe...but who believes all accident reports in their right mind anyway.
my bit about centralising the controls wasnt about spin recovery.

In a loss of control scenario, " ... low level aeros ..." could be unintentional. What an uninformed witness describes as "low level aeros" could be attempts to recover control of an airplane. The cause of a loss of control is all too often never determined. R.I.P. your friend.

Grog

[Gipsy Queen]

The real problem here in the US anyway is that there is no statutory requirement that a prospective pilot ever experience a spin before becoming licensed. This is one reason (I believe) that stall spin accidents in the pattern and elsewhere are still far too common. For the majority of those accidents the pilot keeps the stick buried to the rear, primarily out of fear and inexperience I'm guessing. If the PIC had simply released the back pressure up to the point of autorotation or even in most cases after it they would not have fatally crashed their perfectly good airplane. Everything I have written here is intended primarily for that audience- the one who doesn't know what adverse yaw even looks like, much less a developing spin. For that audience, and perhaps that audience only, keeping the stick back is simply not the right advice and nearly all GA aircraft will fail to recover or will take unduly long to recover if the back pressure on the stick is not released immediately after applying opposite rudder.

Perhaps I was wrong when I offered that spins are not the great unknown- they aren't, but how your aircraft will react when in one or entering one is highly variable, hence this discussion.

Warm regards-
dce

I'm a dinosaur from the time when perhaps most aircraft and certainly all trainers, would spin and spin recovery techniques were a mandatory requirement of the ab initio syllabus. As a consequence, I have never had a problem with controlling any aircraft cleared for such manoeuvres. Actually, not quite true. I once came very close to disaster when a Chipmunk went almost flat in an erect spin - I was lucky to recover but lost over 2,000ft in the process. Never went more than two turns after that.

Wonkazoo is correct - the absence of spin appreciation from statutory licensing requirements is a serious omission. Frankly, I don't subscribe to the theory that modern light aircraft don't spin and therefore teaching recovery is not necessary. That might have a spurious validity in a straight and level stall (if the a/c can be made to stall) but most incidences seem to occur in the circuit, suggesting a spin initiated by an unintended wing drop or something similar. The rudder has become a secondary level of control and little understood by those brought up on flat-engined, nosewheel aircraft.

In a parallel thread related to IMC ratings, I have suggested that all PPL candidates should receive ca.10 hours basic IMC experience to give them a degree of competence when caught out by weather. Similarly, I think it would improve general safety and prove a useful piloting experience (I'm not advocating an advanced "skill") if spin recovery was reintroduced to the standard examination. Of course, where they find suitable aircraft is different problem . . .

[what next]

Modern pilots have never experienced a spin because it is no longer taught in basic training.
The powers that be decided that there were more deaths in spin training than from accidental spins.

As this tragic accident shows, even experienced display pilots flying aerobatic aircraft can be caught out by certain types of spin. No matter how much spin training they have received in a Cessna 152 during their initial PPL course. Therefore I personally think that teaching spin avoidance instead of spin recovery is the right thing to do.

[gearlever]

As this tragic accident shows, even experienced display pilots flying aerobatic aircraft can be caught out by certain types of spin. No matter how much spin training they have received in a Cessna 152 during their initial PPL course. Therefore I personally think that teaching spin avoidance instead of spin recovery is the right thing to do.

No spin recovery training for glider license (LAPL) in Germany.

[Gipsy Queen]

As this tragic accident shows, even experienced display pilots flying aerobatic aircraft can be caught out by certain types of spin. No matter how much spin training they have received in a Cessna 152 during their initial PPL course. Therefore I personally think that teaching spin avoidance instead of spin recovery is the right thing to do.

I was thinking of something less prosaic than a 152! Nevertheless, I agree with you absolutely, However, things don't always go as expected so it is useful to have a "plan B"; avoidance first and recovery second. After all, we do spend sim time practising recovery from unusual attitudes which might be seen as an extension to my argument.

[ehwatezedoing]

As this tragic accident shows, even experienced display pilots flying aerobatic aircraft can be caught out by certain types of spin. No matter how much spin training they have received in a Cessna 152 during their initial PPL course. Therefore I personally think that teaching spin avoidance instead of spin recovery is the right thing to do.
No, let me rephrase that.
As this tragic accident shows, even experienced display pilots flying aerobatic aircraft can be caught out by certain types of controls malfunctions or sudden medical problems.

Too soon for me to simply conclude that he screwed the pooch on a spin via a grainy youtube video.

[dash34]

Could it be as simple as the pilot applying an incorrect rudder input and holding it thinking that it takes a few turns for the aircraft to recover? Then by the time the mistake was realized it was too late to recover?

[blind pew]

Had and know of several occurrences especially in turbulence.
Doing a clean stall in a Beech baron had it flick inverted with ailerons and rudder virtually centred. Similarly mountain flying in a grob twin Astir doing figure of eights at 200ft agl. Colleague doing high fly in a trident 1 and when the stick push went off the nose just hovered for several seconds.

[oleczek]

According to tvn24.pl (https://www.tvn24.pl/plock-pilot-jak-52-do-konca-przytomny-nagranie-z-kamery,950295,s.html)

The camera that was attached to the outside of the plane and was pointing into the cockpit has been recovered. The face of the pilot although partially obscured is visible. Pilot was conscious until the very end and perished during initial impact. There does not appear to be any urgency in the pilots actions, which leads to speculation that the pilot might have been confused by the the reflections from the water surface and not aware of the low altitude. Preliminary investigation by Panstwowa Komisja Badania Wypadkow Lotniczych (NTSB equivalent) determined that the plane was fully serviceable and did not suffer any in flight malfunction. Although fuel contamination has not been ruled out as tests are still pending. At this point the main cause of the accident appears to be a pilot's error.

Olek