Spinning/Spin Awareness

[terryJones]

Having come to power flying via gliding, I was surprised to see that Spinning was not a requirement in the PPL sylabus.
It would be interesting to hear other Ppruner's observations on this. I for one, am glad that if I ever do find myself in an inadvertent spin, it will not be the first time I have witnessed the ground rotating around the nose!
I would not wish to have had my FIRST fully developed spin in a a/c with an empty right hand seat.
Comments please lads and lasses

[Barney_Gumble]

I understand the rationale for excluding this activity from the JAR PPL(A) syllabus is that spin avoidance is taught so the student is taught how to recognise the incipient spin signs and recover to fully controlled flight prior to the spin developing.

As to the wisdom of this I would not offer a comment..........

Suffice it to say that I specifically asked my instructor to include a lesson on spinning and spin recovery during my PPL training and I am very glad I did. I would not want to undertake this manoeuvre intentionally without a good instructor of a good aerobatic pilot in the RH seat!

I have an aerobatics course on my list of things to do and so will explore this part of the envelope later on.

Andy

[Flash0710]

As far as im concerned please agree

Spinning is worst case scenario

It the culmunation of your biggest F~@K up if you know how to deal with a spin you have little more to worry about bar losing a wing.

imho it should be in the ppl tuition regime it can happen and does

it took me 2 yrs with a ppl b4 i spun that was mainly due to bar stories of how " terrifying "it was this as always translated to bulls@@t after a much talked into spinning session.

its not that bad and if it saves you one day why not do it..??

[Lowtimer]

It's one of those subjects which is endlessly debated. Spinning was made non compulsory on the back of arguments about safety, e.g. whether the number of accidents incurred during training was greater than the number of accidents from inadvertent spins experienced by non spin trained PPL holders. However there are many other factors which migigate against spinning as part of the PPL, including:
- the unsuitability of large proportions of the training fleet
- the low ceilings imposed by controlled air space around many of the busier training airfields in the SE of England
- the fact that it's an extra hour or two in the syllabus and lots of people don't want to spend the money
- the fact that many people say they find it frightening or offputting

An increasing factor against spinning in the UK as time goes by will be that all the new generation 450 kg two seaters have a blanket regulatory ban on spinning or any kind of aerobatics, regardless of what their designers may have intended, or indeed what they are permitted under other jurisdictions.

If you want to spin, do, but you are definitely right to get some proper dual instruction rather than have a go by yourself. If your PPL training organisation oesn't have the right equipment or instructors go somewhere else, preferably a place that teaches aerobatics, and get a few hours in.

Personally I'm very glad that I learned to spin as a glider pilot and have always made a point of spinning any aeroplane I've flown which is cleared to do it (obviously only if the owner and/or insurer is happy for me to do so). However, I prefer to do so while wearing a parachute, starting at a goodly height, and paying great attention to location and lookout. The lowest height at which I have ever entered a spin is 1000 feet AGL, dual in a Schleicher K-13 glider, straight off a winch launch at Seighford in Staffordshire, as part of of a pre-solo-check. That was quite exciting but with the daring of youth I pressed on, did my one turn and recovery, flew a low level circuit to land with height to spare. But I don't think I'd do it now, I'm much older and it changes your perception of risk. Now, I'd go get an aerotow to at least 3000 feet. In a powered aeroplane, with far greater wing loading and height loss during the spin, I prefer to be at 5000 feet agl minimum, and 10,000 for anything deliberately unconventional, like a flat spin.

[Flyin'Dutch']

Stall spin accidents that kill people almost invariably start at low heights.

It is better to teach people to avoid getting in this situation. If you develop a full spin at these heights (circuit and below) you will be lucky if you get it out at all.

The other category of spinning accidents is those related to aerobatics. I assume (but dont know) that spinning and recovery thereof is part of any aerobatics syllabus.

Only reason I can see to include it in the PPL syllabus would be to take the fearfactor out and show that it is just another exercise which is easily sorted

FD

[Skylark4]

As intimated in the original post, I think it is very unwise for the spin and the recovery proceedure not to be at least demonstrated during training. If the first experience of a spin is the real thing then I don`t expect many people to get out of it very quickly at the first attempt or if they do, not to discover that it will go the other way around just as easily.

Mike W

[Final 3 Greens]

In most SEPs, recovery from a normal spin can be achieved by letting go of the controls...

However, altitude is required for this.

In non aero flying, aside from a departure caused by wake turbulence or avoiding action, it is difficult to see when a spin at recoverable altitude will happen.

The normal case is stall/spin at low altitude, where recovery is not feasible.

I note that the original poster has recently converted from gliders, which require much less altitude to recover from a spin. Even relatively light aeroplanes take thousands, rather than hundreds of feet.

Please do not think that I am taking a side here, I'm just trying to explain why the syllabus is the way it is.... The prevention is better than the cure.

[AerBabe]

My instructor likes people to spin before going solo. Plenty of SSA first, then the fully-developed spin. I had extreme difficulty getting the yoke back far enough to stall, and didn't do any with flaps until later in my training. It's something I would like to go back and do more of later. Especially now I've done some aeros and know I'm not going to come crashing out of the sky... :O

[Aerobatic Flyer]

Even relatively light aeroplanes take thousands, rather than hundreds of feet.

Which ones, and how many thousands?

[Doesn't really matter.... whoever it was that had made that quote above has edited it out in the last couple of hours.]

Of the types I have spun, all will recover promptly if recovery action is initiated as soon as the spin starts - which is what a trained pilot would do in an inadvertent spin incident.

Having said that, the pilot who knew how to recover probably wouldn't have spun in the first place..... And, in my view, spin training should be included in the PPL syllabus.

TerryJones - Spin training for glider pilots has a much greater importance, due to the likelihood of inadvertently spinning. Turning in a turbulent thermal at just a few knots faster than Vs carries a high risk of spinning (as I discovered one bumpy day in a Janus.... :rolleyes: )

[Miserlou]

The exclusion of spinning, real, 1,2,perhaps more turns is criminally ignorant as I have mentioned on another thread.

If you can't see how it would happen look at the accident stats. Stall/spin on final turn after engine failure-major killer!

Don't turn a drama into a crisis-maintain proper flying speed.
Don't turn a crisis into a tragedy-Let your spin recovery be a reflex, not a conscious effort; saved my old man's life!

I heard the BGA or, at least the local gliding club, were now insisting on incipient spin recovery from circuit height. Anyone like to comment.

Aerobatic recovery technique is a little different to minimum height loss, requiring clean entry, exact number of rotations and stopped on heading, and a vertical down line.

Like a glider pilot, to be safe, you really must be able to feel where the aircraft is in relation to angle of attack-instinctively!

[stiknruda]

Spinning.

Every few months here on Pprune Private Flying, this topic re-emerges.

My point of view.....

If you want to do it - go get good instruction. If you don't then restrict your flying to driving the aeroplane using the prescribed set of numbers that your instructor gave you for that machine.

Personally, I spin a lot and in the past 6 months have gotten over my own fear of single seat inverted multi-rotation spinning.

Aerbabe - my dear, great to hear that you want to start aerobatting!

However - spinning can seriously damage your health, PH (who competed in the world's advanced competion for RSA only a few months ago) killed himself last week after flattening an erect spin and not recovering before he hit the hard stuff. RIP friend.

If I am allowing the spin to develop (eg. to allow stability before I alter the characteristics with either aileron or power) I do it in the firmament. If it is a single rotation after a competion entry then I might start it at sub 2000' agl.

stik

Stik

[Final 3 Greens]

Aerobatic Flyer

I made the following comment ….

“Even relatively light aeroplanes take thousands, rather than hundreds of feet.”

And I didn’t edit it out, you must have been p*ssed when you read the post :D

“Which ones, and how many thousands?”

The only POH I have to hand is for a Bulldog….

“350 ft per turn should be used for the calculation of the height at which recovery is to be initiated and a further 1000 ft included to allow for additional height that might be lost during the pull out recovery when the spin has stopped.”

So three turns and a pull out should be planned for 1950ft – which I believe is in the order of magnitude of thousands rather than hundreds.

I imagine that a flight training organisation would plan per the POH, even though experienced aerobatic pilots could probably achieve far less height loss.

[juswonnafly]

This hotly debated subject is a matter of probability...........

Spin whilst turning onto final and you probably die............

Spin with height and you probably live.............

What really matters is being able to recognise the approaching 'spin scenario' and competently deal with it.

This is why stall and spin awareness training is taught. When the horse has bolted, it's too late.

I do teach spinning to students who ask, and usually suggest a demo to those who don't.

Me? I do enjoy spinning but ONLY with 5000 ft beneath me first!

JWF

;)

[FlyingForFun]

Very interesting. This subject does seem to come up from time to time, but I don't recall ever seeing so many posters as in favour of spin training as on this thread. Wonder what's changed since last time it was discussed?

Personally, I agree that spinning should be demonstrated. An inadvertant wing-drop during a planned stall can be disconcerting - I've never encountered an inadvertant spin, and I know enough to know that I don't want to experience it, but I'm pleased that I've had the training to be able to recover from it without panicking if it does happen (given enough height, of course).

Besides which, spinning is fun - why would anyone not want to do it? :D

The arguments against are that it costs students extra money (crap - anyone who won't spend an extra hour training to do something which may save their life shouldn't be flying), that it puts people off because they fear they will get sick when they spin (valid point - but again, if someone isn't able to keep their cool when the brown stuff hits the fan, should they be flying?) and that spin training results in more accidents during the training than the number of accidents it prevents (haven't seen any figures either way on this one, just abstract arguments.)

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

[destructor]

I-am another who thinks that spinning should be in the training up to PPL.There are two reasons for it not being done:-
1. Alot of instructors are not happy doing it 2.Many of the aircraft are not cleared for spinning.
How many instructors teach the insipiant recovery in aircaft not cleared for spinning? not a good idea as I found out when turbulence finished off the act and we had a spin.

[Aerobatic Flyer]

Final 3 greens

you must have been p*ssed when you read the post :O

Occupational hazard of posting after supper in France, I'm afraid! Sorry about that....

Height loss during recovery from a fully developed multi-turn spin is very much greater than height loss if recovery action is taken as soon as the spin is identified.

I have never flown a Bulldog, but for the types that I have spun height loss from a 1 turn spin is almost always measurable in hundreds of feet.

[MLS-12D]

terryJones, take a look at this thread: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=61118&highlight=spin+training

I understand the point that spin training is likely of little use because most spins happen too low down to recover; but that doesn't seem to me to be a convincing argument why spin training should not form part of the PPL curriculum. I.e., although arguably it is of limited use, it certainly can't do any harm, and may come in handy one day. At the very least, properly taught spin recovery procedures will increase student confidence.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

The saving grace of spin familiarity is that you recognise the symptoms before the full spin develops so you unload the wings (get the stick forward) and keep in balance. And you do it by instinct (no thought required - which is just as well 'cause there isn't time).

Pilots who don't have that familiarity might (probably will) pull the nose UP. With disasterous results.

SSD

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Spin training should be manditory for the PPL.

Period.

Cat Driver:

:DThe hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

[WhiskeyNovember]

I also agree that spin training should be taught. Having practiced spins in an Extra 300 and a C-152, I would encourage spin training in a fully aerobatic aircraft as well as a more conventional aircraft.

I found that doing so offers a new perspective on spins. Spinning a 152 or 172 teaches students proper procedures...in other words, they walk away from the experience with the procedural knowledge to right the aircraft and recover properly.

This technical knowledge, however, should be supplemented with an intimate exposure to extreme unusual attitudes. This exposure is all but impossible in typical light planes...most are inherently stable, and as such, little actual time is spent in the unusual attitude. Indeed, the time spent in it is more often than not spent attempting to MAINTAIN it, rather than recover from it.

If one successfully combines technical spin knowledge and training with intimate familiarity (visual and physiological) with unusual attitudes, I dare say he or she will be a much safer pilot. After all...I'd be willing to bet that many stall/spin accidents could be avoided if the element of surprise/panic could be diminished or eliminated.


-WN

[Final 3 Greens]

Aerobatic Flyer

Height loss during recovery from a fully developed multi-turn spin is very much greater than height loss if recovery action is taken as soon as the spin is identified.

Agreed.

spun height loss from a 1 turn spin is almost always measurable in hundreds of feet.

Seems reasonable.

What I was trying to explain was one of the reasons why spinning isn't on the syllabus.

When you look at the POH of the 'dog (and I expect that similar a/c have similar numbers), the manufacturers say plan on a minimum of 1350ft for a single turn, then I suppose that one can see the train of thought that a stall/spin in the circuit will probably be lethal to a student or average PPL.

The numbers in the POH are probably very conservative for an experienced aero pilot, but they are in b&w and form part of the a/c C of A, so there you go.

The CAA seem to take the view that avoidance is the way to go and deal only with the incipient spin in the syllabus.

However, it would seem that the majority of the posters on this thread take a quite different view.

I think I would stand by the probity of my original posting, but on reflection would word it to indicate that the orders of magnitude for recovery for a glider and SEP are significantly different.

Hoe you enjoyed the wine


:D :D

[Miserlou]

You don't need any exotic machinery to practice spinning.

I seem to remember the humble Rollason Condor has an enthusiastic spin entry, the roll rate exceeding the yaw rate, so it rolled into the spin.

All the same, it stops very quickly.

Ah, the Condor! Ideal trainer.

[terryJones]

I would just like to say, as a newcomer to Ppune, thanks Guys n Gals for all of the comments posted here.
It seems that most people would elect to do spinning. It also seems that a lot of aircraft used for training are not cleared for spinning. Unfortunatlely of course, the Aircraft has not read the book, so, given the right (wrong) circumstances it will 'Depart from controlled flight'
By the same token, I am very glad to report that my instructor was very keen on 'Recovery from unusul attitudes' (I think it helped break his boredom)
I can admit to one occasion since getting my licence where I did come close 'inadvertantly' whilst circling a friends house , at about 12-1300' I was of course more interested for a moment in the ground, and forgot rule number one( Fly The Bl@@dy Aircraft), and rule number two (Gravity never gives up)
Once again, as a new Ppruner, thanks to all.

[High Wing Drifter]

You would have to be pretty confused about your attitude to let your aircraft get into a spin by accident...surely!

[flickoff]

HWD, not necessarily. I'm no expert on the logic/maths of this stuff, but it seems to me that an a/c can only spin if it's stalled. This may seem passe, but what is the stall speed of your aircraft- wrong answer proably, whatever you said.

There you are fat dumb and happy pootling round some turn or other, doesn't matter where, and you pull a bit to get round the turn, perhaps to maintain hieght. Now you are in say a 2G turn, suddlenly the stall speed you thought you had is now way to slow, keep pulling and adding G and up goes the stall speed. Bingo high speed spin entry. Whizzo fun, or not depends on what you expected!

You do not have to be at a jaunty attidude to spin. If you think that you do, I strongly suggest you go and get some spin training in something hot that will demo all this stuff in saftely -4G pulls and spin entries in a warrior are probably not a good thing, unless you have a death wish.

:=

[FNG]

HWD, I may have misinterpreted your post, but it appeared to imply that stalling and spinning are connected with aircraft attitude relative to the horizon, rather than with angle of attack. It is quite possible to stall and spin in a variety of attitudes, as can be demonstrated by a trip with an aerobatic instructor. Even without going aerobatic, training in slow flight explores the aircraft's behaviour when flown at a high angle of attack. The pilot who stalls and spins in from a turn (perhaps under the stress of an engine failure, to use a relatively common scenario) probably does not experience, subjectively, a particularly extreme attitude before the aircraft departs.

I think that PPL training ought to include spinning, but appreciate the various reasons why it doesn't. I agree with FFF that spinning can be rather good fun, once you've tried it.

[stiknruda]

It is amazing really what you learn on this forum.

Gene Beggs has been one of my aerobatic heroes since I first went upside down in Texas over 10 years ago.

Now I learn that he lives not too far from where I first aerobatted and that he wrote a book.

I e-mailed him last week and today Leighton, my postie delivered two copies of Gene's book. (One copy is a birthday pressie for a buddy!) Enclosed was an invoice. Great book and great service!!

Stik

[Ludwig]

Stik did it make your hair stand on end when you started to read it?

[stiknruda]

Ludwig,

It arrived at 1230. I decided to open the envelope but not take the book out of the cellophane.

Because I was going flying!

Ran through this year's std sequence a couple of times played with some flicks and then did a 3 turn accelerated spin from 3 thou before heading home.

Landed. Opened the book and only put it down after reading about his " Second Close Call in the Pitts".

Hair standing on end - yep! Do I think that this book should be compulsory reading for Pitts pilots? Yep.

The funny thing is that I know all about the Beggs-Muller/ Muller-Beggs recovery and have read Muller's book but didn't know that Gene had written one! Thanks for his e-addy. Would love to pop in and see him/fly with him next month when I go look at the aeroplane we discussed the other day.

See you soon

Stik

[High Wing Drifter]

I strongly suggest you go and get some spin training in something hot that will demo all this stuff in saftely -4G pulls and spin entries in a warrior are probably not a good thing, unless you have a death wish.
Only in a 152 thus far, but one has to give the little fella some serious stick before it gives in. I am talking about stalling in a 60 degree bank. Any other provocation barely results in a wing drop , which a bit of rudder sorts out before anything like a spin develops.

I am very inexeperienced, so I have to ask just when does one anticipate stalling an aircraft so severly by accident? On approach? During a PFL? In a wake?

However, the idea of being forced to set fire to my house to test my fire extinguisher does not strike me as the best approach. Methinks, one should be encouraged to practice spin recovery only when converting to planes where a spin is likely to be a serious issue.

[FNG]

"converting to [aero]planes where a spin is likely to be a serious issue"

So, that'll be, er....all aeroplanes then (leaving Canards and Aircoupes out of this). Situations for spinning? as you mention: on approach, during a forced landing, trying to get a shot on the Wycombe Chipmunk in a turning fight (hey, Andy, that was just nibbling the buffet). Wake turbulence may be more likely to put you in an unusual attitude, from which, if you don't recover, you might spin.

[flyingwysiwyg]

I have only recently got my licence and the grand total of 0.8hrs on my log book since passing the skills test (Bl@@dy Weather), so somebody please correct me if I am wrong, :O but I believe I am correct in saying that one of the less expected nasty ones is a turn from up wind to down wind through 180.

Say for example head wind is 30 knots (IAS reads 90) and you pull a steep 180 degree turn to the right (or left) your stall speed goes up anyway( due to steep angle of bank), but then all of a sudden you have lost 30 knots of airspeed because you are flying down wind.

Stall and Spin territory :eek:

Somebody slap me if I'm wrong!

[FlyingForFun]

No. No No No NO NO!!!

The wind has absolutely NO effect on aircraft performance. Ever. Full stop.

What you are getting confused with is the visual effects which can happen if you're close to the ground. During the turn, the wind will make the aircraft appear to be skidding across the sky very much out of balance, when in actual fact it is in balance. The pilot then (mistakenly) increases the amount of bank angle, which increases the stall speed and takes the aircraft out of balance - and that's a recipe for a stall/spin. It's not the wind that causes it, it's the pilot. I have to say I've never heard a first-hand (or even second-hand) story of anyone falling foul of this, but I have read lots of old wives tales.

The only time that wind can cause control difficulties, apart from take-off and landing, is in wind-shear. Any other time, the aircraft's movement is always relative to the air mass, regardless of what the air mass is doing.

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

[stiknruda]

Agree with FFF - good description ...

Flying out of balance is sloppy, it affects aircraft performance and shows that you aren't paying much attention.

On centreline seating types it is pretty east to tell when you are out of balance by different pressures on your bum cheeks!

It works in side by side aeroplanes but it is probably easier to learn this in tandem types.

If the left side of your bum feels "heavier" or has the seat pressing harder against it, you need more left rudder.... simple really!

There are times when you need to fly out of balance but these are generally in aerobatics and in side-slipping.

Stik

[witchdoctor]

Same argument goes for skid recovery to be part of learning to drive. Everybody would agree it is a good idea, but how many do it when they are totally focussed on their licence?

Licences don't make good pilots/drivers - experience does. I'm sure there is a very good reason the University Air Squadron system used to teach spinning at an early point in the syllabus. Fantastic fun and bloody useful, especially when young guys go solo GH in a (fully?) aerobatic a/c like the (mighty?) Bulldog - just too tempting. I'm all for it.

Oh, and if the 'dog loses 350 feet per spin, that's 2050ft to do 3 spins and recover within another 1000ft (just thought I'd correct some earlier maths).;)

[FormationFlyer]

On myth to quash here....

Spinning IS on the syllabus. It always HAS been and always WILL be.

Ex11A Spin Avoidance & Awareness - Recovery from incipient spin
MANDATORY
This exercise MUST appear in all log books as part of the 2 hours of stall spin training as required under JAR FCL-1. Any organisation FAILING to provide this training is NOT complying with JAR FCL.

Ex11B Fully Developed Spin Recoveries
OPTIONAL
This exercise is optional and is dependent on FOB of the RF/FTO in question, as well as the a/c CofA/FOM/POH and the discrection of the FI and student. My advice is simple - if its available and is offered - take it.


Hope this clears up comments like 'spinning is not in the syllabus' or 'spinning was removed from the syllabus' - If these comments are made by an instructor or an examiner then that person should themselves consider some retraining....and some time spent with the *actual* documents specifying what should be taught.

I also wish to endorse comments by stiknruda & flyingforfun....both damn good points.

Re: wind & turns - obviously the article a couple of months ago in flyer magazine was missed by flyingwysiwyg

[flyingwysiwyg]

FFF & Stik:

That will be a NO then.

Thanks for putting me straight on that one! I stand corrected :O

Formation Flyer:

I will look that article up in Pilot when I get a chance. What issue was it? as I only recently renewed my subs.

When I did my PPL I elected to do exercise 11B in a 152 Aerobat (Better harness). Must admit I was extremely aprehensive of doing it, and did only manage to utter the word s**t during my first attempted recovery, but I do think its like a lot of things, once you've done it once, you realise it's not as bad as a lot of people make out. Ended up quite liking it after a bit.

fwyg

[FlyingForFun]

fwyg,

I've always found that posting crap on PPRuNe is one of the greatest ways of learning things... the crap that I've been known to post has never gone very long without being corrected ;)

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

[stiknruda]

Flyingwsywig,

It is unfortunate that few ab-initio instructors know how to enter a spin in a smooth, gentle competition type entry.

Years ago when I was learning to fly my instructress warned me that her 150 didn't really like to enter a spin. To make it spin she flicked it into a spin and the entry was rather frightening.

It put years on me and it took me a couple of years to pluck up courage to want to get some more spin training!




THAT GENE BEGGS BOOK IS ENTHRALLING AND I'M HOPING FOR DECENT WX THIS W/E TO ALLOW ME TO RUN THROUGH LESSONS 1 to 4



Stik

[strake]

Strakes philosophy is stated below........

Hmmmm... It used to say "spin 'till yer dizzy!"

[LOMCEVAK]

Let's start a new thread on loss of speed turning downwind if anyone is interested! Basically, same effect as windshear. Aircraft have inertia (which is referenced to the earth and not the airmass in which an aircraft flies) and so IAS will not change instantly when the headwind component changes. You don't notice it too much in a 1000 kg aeroplane, but when you get to 250+tonnes.....

As for spinning, if you only teach someone incipient spinning and he tries it on his own and the aircraft does not recover, would it not have been a good idea to show him how to get out of a fully developed spin? A little knowledge is a dangerous thing!

[Flyin'Dutch']

LOMCEVAK

Reread FFF's postings. Windshear is something completely different!! Don't confuse the issue.


Stik

Any chance you could post a link re the book.

FD

[High Wing Drifter]

As for spinning, if you only teach someone incipient spinning and he tries it on his own and the aircraft does not recover, would it not have been a good idea to show him how to get out of a fully developed spin? A little knowledge is a dangerous thing!
You would have to be pretty wreckless to practice incipient spins if you have not been trained to recover!

Mentioned elsewhere I think, but more pilots are killed practising spins than befalling inadvertent spins.

Each to their own, but this thread has the general air that spinning is a normal activity that we should all endeavour to excersise and that we are incomplete pilots if we don't - tosh!. Inexperienced pilots should not feel comfortable putting their aircraft into a spin just in case it may happen for real.

My guess is that spinning has little to do with generall all round safe and efficient PPL skills.

:rolleyes:

[FNG]

Re-read the post: there was no suggestion of practising incipient spinning without being trained in this. The scenario posited was that of a diligent PPL who has been trained in incipient spin recovery, and who, just as he practices forced landings, sensibly practices getting into potential stall/spin situations. Suppose that one day he bodges his recovery and spins. He has never spun before, still less recovered. Good luck to him.

There are, as far as I am aware, relatively few accidents during spin practice. Spinning accidents seem to occur during low-level deliberate naughtiness, and following inadvertent loss of control in sitiuations such as forced landings (I agree with all above who emphasis the need to recognise and deal with incipent spins) . Avweb has a thoughtful article on this:-

http:??www.avweb.com/news/safety/181570-1.html

I don't think anyone is suggesting that everyone should be obliged to go spinning a lot, or to spin solo, or that if you don't spin you are not a competent pilot. I would say, however, that exploring the aircraft's behaviour in all regimes of flight may make your training more complete. It may also be a comfort to have it demonstrated that the system does work. Many things in flying do exactly what they say on the tin: : if you apply dead reckoning nav, you will get there, if you set up your PFL correctly, you should get into your field. If you spin a typical trainer/tourer (which is allowed to spin on purpose) , it will respond to standard recovery procedures (always allowing for some oddity of trim etc and the fact that spinning is never 100% predictable). Aircraft which are not certified for deliberate spinning cannot read their own placards and are capable of spinning and of recovering from a spin. Shouldn't the pilot be likewise?

[Final 3 Greens]

FNG

Aircraft which are not certified for deliberate spinning cannot read their own placards and are capable of spinning and of recovering from a spin

Not 100% the case, e.g. the Warrior, as tame an aeroplane as I have ever flown, may enter a non-recoverable flat spin with a rear c of g.

In that condition, the pilot MUST avoid a spin. So one needs to know the aircraft before making sweeping assumptions.

Havings said that, I don't wish to be a member of the 'killer tourers club', just realistic about what a type will and will not do.

[FNG]

Yowch! The very aircraft type which regularly struggles back from Le Touq with too much wine stuffed in the back.... Another good reason for keeping my log book in its pristine Warrior-free state. Should they be retro-fitted with bang-seats? Anyway, edit post above to say: they'll all spin, and most of them will recover.

[FlyingForFun]

Lomcevak,Aircraft have inertia (which is referenced to the earth and not the airmass in which an aircraft flies)This is wrong. Inertia is actually referenced to the airmass through which the aircraft was flying a moment ago. In the case of straight flight, this is equivalent to referencing it to the earth - and in fact it is more convenient (and so more common) to do so when describing how windshear works. But when talking about a turning aircraft, it is wrong.

Think about it: Why should inertia be referenced to the surface of the earth? Remember that the earth is spinning around, constantly, very very fast. And it's moving through space even faster. And it's orbiting the sun. And science just happens to pick some random surface a few thousand feet away from our aircraft, which happens to be describing a very complex shape through space, to reference inertia to? Sounds unlikely to me.

What actually happens is that a body's momentum is measured relative to space. But when a body is on the earth, or flying in an airmass, there are all kinds of other effects on that body, such as gravity from the earth and the sun, reactions from other bodies, and so on, which we conveniently ignore - and doing so allows us to assume that momentum is relative to the earth, or the airmass, or whatever - which the body's velocity was measured against a moment ago.

FFF
----------

[Final 3 Greens]

FNG

Yowch! The very aircraft type which regularly struggles back from Le Touq with too much wine stuffed in the back....

Still it won't spin inless stalled 1st! And I reckon you'd have to try pretty hard anyway with a Warrior ;)

[FormationFlyer]

I think it prudent to point out the it is not wise to be complacent about 'needs to stall before it spins' - given that the time difference between the two could be sub-second.

Many people make this statement implying aicraft spin following a stall in a sedate manner as do when training pilots....it wont happen this way in real life... check it out...

pilot with flaps down over banks and then over pulls to keep tight...One wing stalls, and the aircraft almost instantly flicks.

flick a.k.a spin.

It can happen very very fast....

[stiknruda]

Final 3 greens...

I, too until very recently (Wednesday evening!) thought that an aeroplane can not spin unless it is stalled...

Gene Beggs, perhaps a little pedantically, in his fine book states that an aeroplane will spin if the application of rudder causes the downgoing wing to stall.

If you think of a flick roll entry (an autorotation in the horizontal plane; ie a spin!) this is exactly what happens...

as the stick comes back you hoof in rudder and it snaps into a spin.

Formation Flyer is also right - the time between the two events can be measured in nano-seconds and not very many of them!

Ho hum, all ready to go flying but the viz and ceiling here are dictating otherwise.


Stik

Stik

[Final 3 Greens]

Formation/Stik

Points very well made.

Stik

Gene Beggs, perhaps a little pedantically, in his fine book states that an aeroplane will spin if the application of rudder causes the downgoing wing to stall.

I haven't read this book and am genuinely interested in what this statement implies to the oft taught method of preventing further wing drop at the stall with rudder. Can a spin be provoked this way?

[Ludwig]

Are yes stik, but, don't forget it has stalled, as in flicking you have exceeded the critical AoA rapidly before hoofing in the rudder. You try the same thing in slow montion and you get an uncorodinated barrellytype rolly thing. Once the critical AoA is exceeded the wing is stalled; it has nothing necessarily to do with airspeed - or at least I don't think it has.:)

[stiknruda]

Ludwig - I was trying to explain using the flick as an example, yes you are correct.... critical AoA is exceeded!

F3G - Does one not use opposite rudder to pick up a dropped (or dropping) wing?!?!

Stik

[Final 3 Greens]

Stik

F3G - Does one not use opposite rudder to pick up a dropped (or dropping) wing?!?!

One would hope so, although an instructor once told me about a student who added pro drop input!

However in asking the question I did not make any assumptions about why, as I was keeping an open mind, so if your response implies that the answer is no, then thanks for confirming that.

I was wondering if there was an ulterior reason such as blanking airflow from the dropped wing with opp rudder.

[MLS-12D]

stiknruda, I think you'll like this: http://www.avweb.com/news/profiles/182606-2.html

[Final 3 Greens]

Interesting article MLS 12 D.

I'm pleased that my first experiences of flying were learning in gliders.

No chance of using the rudders as footrests in those. :O

[Flyin'Dutch']

It is obviously excellent practice to fly at near stall speeds and to keep the wings level with the use of rudder while doing so.

If anything it teaches people to unlearn the reflex to pick a wing up with aileron.

However when teaching people to recover from the incipient spin; and that is what it is all about if we are teaching people to fly through the skies safely; is to hammer home to them that the first thing to do when getting the tell tale signs of a stall is to unload the aeroplane!

Stick forward.

At the end of the day that is what will save your bacon. Nowt else.

You can be an ace at spinrecovery etc etc etc, but if you spin it in on the turn to final which typically would happen between 400 to 600 foot you will be dead as a dodo in the majority of cases.

No matter how nifty your footwork.

FD

[imcaeros]

Please try a spin in a light aircraft turning final in the circuit - any survivors and the beers are on me lads!:D :D

...and no I don't believe your airfield flies curcuits at 5000'!

[FNG]

I recall that last year an Auster spun in from (approximately) downwind, crashing inverted into trees. The pilot survived. This is not, however, a recommendation for doing this.