Spin training
Guest
Posts: n/a
Weed - absolutely right in my opinion. Incidentally, the 'recommended' bi-ennial dual training flight with an FI(A) now required under JAR-FCL includes a deliberate stall with a 45 deg wing drop!! How are we supposed to do that in an aircraft in which 'intentional spinning' is prohibited. To abuse an aircraft of this type to such an extent that it exhibits this behaviour merely to satisfy the whim of some old CAA dinosaur is absurdly poor aviation practice!! But it is only a recommendation - so we shall totally ignore it!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
In a long and entertaining (so far) career of testing aeroplanes I'd say that virtually anything can be made to spin; I can only think of one type that genuinely was spin resistant - I've certainly seen spin several types that I was assured wouldn't.
IMHO spin training should be re-introduced. Not intensively, but enough to allow pilots to identify it and take the correct recovery. I certify mostly non-aerobatic aircraft and they usually need spin testing and we put recovery advice in the manual, BUT what chance has the pilot of doing the right thing if he's never been shown it.
(N.B. Personal record in flight testing was a 19 turn spin; recovery having been initiated at turn 6; can anybody beat that? We were evaluating different sets of recovery actions at the time, that version was shortly afterwards rejected.)
G
IMHO spin training should be re-introduced. Not intensively, but enough to allow pilots to identify it and take the correct recovery. I certify mostly non-aerobatic aircraft and they usually need spin testing and we put recovery advice in the manual, BUT what chance has the pilot of doing the right thing if he's never been shown it.
(N.B. Personal record in flight testing was a 19 turn spin; recovery having been initiated at turn 6; can anybody beat that? We were evaluating different sets of recovery actions at the time, that version was shortly afterwards rejected.)
G
Guest
Posts: n/a
Personally, I have never voluntarily spun anything without either a parachute or a bang seat.
But getting a student to recognise that buffet with undemanded roll or yaw is a bad omen, is wise. Teaching the recovery makes sense as well!
This can safely be done on most training aircraft without endagering yourself, and it fits in with the old CAA syllabus. Not sure about the JAA though.
But getting a student to recognise that buffet with undemanded roll or yaw is a bad omen, is wise. Teaching the recovery makes sense as well!
This can safely be done on most training aircraft without endagering yourself, and it fits in with the old CAA syllabus. Not sure about the JAA though.
EMERGENCY RECOVERY ACTIONS
If room commences to spin:[list=1][*]apply full opposite eye-ball[*]Ease head forward slowly[*]Centralise glass and refill[/list=a]
If room commences to spin:[list=1][*]apply full opposite eye-ball[*]Ease head forward slowly[*]Centralise glass and refill[/list=a]
Guest
Posts: n/a
To me spinning is one of the 'lost arts' of aviation these days - just like the boring 'compas turn'!!
There was a recent accident in OZ where a young bloke alegedly crossed his controls at low level a dug a large hole in the ground!!(killing 3 of his mates in the process)
Had he had the correct training & appreciation maybe this wouldn't have happened!!
My first GA CFI had 8000 instructional hours in Tiger Moths!! Not much hearing left but he certainly knew how to fly an airplane!!
The only time he ever got agitated in an aircraft was on the turn onto final - he always considered it one of the most dangerous times.
As for C-150/152's it is very hard to get them to 'spin' - they will readily enter a 'spiral dive' but to make them spin with a stable airspeed requires either lots of experience or an orangutan masquarading as a human!!
I have carried out over 140 initial tests in C150/152's, had to spin each one (like a lot of girls - some would & some wouldn't) - it was always good fun.
In the old OZ sylabus a student had to demonstrate a recovery from a spin before going solo - how times have changed - we never lost one student in that period to spinning accidents.
The only fatality due to spinning in OZ in those days was in a Chipmunk that got a 'two bob' coin stuck under the control column.
My humble opinion - bring back the spin - vote for me!!
------------------
Lux Lucidum Lucidentes
[This message has been edited by XP-72 (edited 18 February 2000).]
There was a recent accident in OZ where a young bloke alegedly crossed his controls at low level a dug a large hole in the ground!!(killing 3 of his mates in the process)
Had he had the correct training & appreciation maybe this wouldn't have happened!!
My first GA CFI had 8000 instructional hours in Tiger Moths!! Not much hearing left but he certainly knew how to fly an airplane!!
The only time he ever got agitated in an aircraft was on the turn onto final - he always considered it one of the most dangerous times.
As for C-150/152's it is very hard to get them to 'spin' - they will readily enter a 'spiral dive' but to make them spin with a stable airspeed requires either lots of experience or an orangutan masquarading as a human!!
I have carried out over 140 initial tests in C150/152's, had to spin each one (like a lot of girls - some would & some wouldn't) - it was always good fun.
In the old OZ sylabus a student had to demonstrate a recovery from a spin before going solo - how times have changed - we never lost one student in that period to spinning accidents.
The only fatality due to spinning in OZ in those days was in a Chipmunk that got a 'two bob' coin stuck under the control column.
My humble opinion - bring back the spin - vote for me!!
------------------
Lux Lucidum Lucidentes
[This message has been edited by XP-72 (edited 18 February 2000).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
I agree with Capt Homesick on this one
Last week on my FI course I was demo'ing an approach config stall in a C152(flap 20, 1500 rpm)and at the point of stall the right wing dropped violently thru 100 degs. I recoved O.K but but my 'patter' dried up and I felt quite shaken.
At debrief we agreed that cause was probably due to being out of balance at stall (only a bit though!).
Lesson learnt? Yup! wings level, ball in middle and yes Cessna's will bite!
JWF
Guest
Posts: n/a
JWF - if you are using 20 deg of flap & 1500RPM it ain't a 'stall in the approach' configuration.
Should be 30 deg of flap & 1500RPM, or in the 150 - 40 deg of flap & 1500RPM.
I don't think it really matters whether the ball is centered or not in that sort of configuration - depending on how the aircraft it rigged - it will snap in either direction!!
That is why it is taught!! To show pilots that mishandling close to the stall will cause them to dig a big hole in the ground if they are not carefull.
The fact that your instructor was not up to speed on what would/could occur is the worrying part of your post.
As a matter of interest there is a cam type bolt in each wing that allows for 1/4 deg riggers angle of attack to be applied.
When I did all my test flying we had one of the best blokes in the business as chief of assembly - he also just happened to have flown JU-52's & Pigs later in PNG - Frank Smith RIP. He was a fanatic on this sort of thing & sometimes I had to go out & test fly one 4 or 4 times to make it work!!
------------------
Lux Lucidum Lucidentes
Should be 30 deg of flap & 1500RPM, or in the 150 - 40 deg of flap & 1500RPM.
I don't think it really matters whether the ball is centered or not in that sort of configuration - depending on how the aircraft it rigged - it will snap in either direction!!
That is why it is taught!! To show pilots that mishandling close to the stall will cause them to dig a big hole in the ground if they are not carefull.
The fact that your instructor was not up to speed on what would/could occur is the worrying part of your post.
As a matter of interest there is a cam type bolt in each wing that allows for 1/4 deg riggers angle of attack to be applied.
When I did all my test flying we had one of the best blokes in the business as chief of assembly - he also just happened to have flown JU-52's & Pigs later in PNG - Frank Smith RIP. He was a fanatic on this sort of thing & sometimes I had to go out & test fly one 4 or 4 times to make it work!!
------------------
Lux Lucidum Lucidentes
Guest
Posts: n/a
The spin debate will go on forever.
The argument that you don't know how to fly until you have seen a spin could also apply to other aerobatic maneuvers.Safe flight is the final objective.Spinning an airplane that is designed to be spin resistent is not a clever thing to do .
Question How many pilots do you know that have spun a large transport aircraft,such as a 747 or a A320?I don't know one,haven't heard of one ,but that doesn't mean they don't know how to avoid the spin.
Back to the best spin training device in the world the bar stool.advi vidi tacit
The argument that you don't know how to fly until you have seen a spin could also apply to other aerobatic maneuvers.Safe flight is the final objective.Spinning an airplane that is designed to be spin resistent is not a clever thing to do .
Question How many pilots do you know that have spun a large transport aircraft,such as a 747 or a A320?I don't know one,haven't heard of one ,but that doesn't mean they don't know how to avoid the spin.
Back to the best spin training device in the world the bar stool.advi vidi tacit
Captain Ming Yuan Ho spun and recovered a China Ailines 747SP on 18 Feb 1985.
Captain Harvey "Hoot" Gibson recovered from a spin in a TWA 727-100 on 4 April 1979.
Captain Harvey "Hoot" Gibson recovered from a spin in a TWA 727-100 on 4 April 1979.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well I'm most definitely in favour of it. I'm not going to get into the debate about the merits of spin training at PPL level, but I will say this: I think it is absolutely absurd that you can hold a commercial licence without being spin-rated. In fact, I'll go as far as saying that if it were up to me, basic aerobatic training would be mandatory for a CPL - not just spinning.
I did my aerobatic endorsement before completing my CPL, I enjoyed every bit of it, and I know without a shadow of a doubt that I'm a more capable, more confident, more professional, and safer pilot for the experience. I also know that my passengers will never have to worry about their pilot freaking out and losing the plot when unforseen turbulence tips the aeroplane beyond 60 degrees angle of bank - because I've been there done that, and actually have some idea on how to salvage the situation. I deserve to have that safety net - and so do my passengers.
I did my aerobatic endorsement before completing my CPL, I enjoyed every bit of it, and I know without a shadow of a doubt that I'm a more capable, more confident, more professional, and safer pilot for the experience. I also know that my passengers will never have to worry about their pilot freaking out and losing the plot when unforseen turbulence tips the aeroplane beyond 60 degrees angle of bank - because I've been there done that, and actually have some idea on how to salvage the situation. I deserve to have that safety net - and so do my passengers.
Guest
Posts: n/a
XP-72, Some places call 1500RPM 20 Flaps an approach configuration stall and 1500RPM,30/45 Flaps a Landing configuration stall, as for not being able to spin a c150/152, any aircraft will spin but I agree you must have the controls way out of wack to make it happen. With the C150/152 that won't spin, try (for a left spin); Power idle, Pitch up approx 75 degrees, stall horn, full left rudder, then full right aileron, just for good measure as it flicks, full power for added torque effect, it will spin 1 turn before you even realise whats happening
Guest
Posts: n/a
Angle of Attack...You beat me to a reply (I do agree with you though!)
XP-72....I am not sure how to make you out. Your statements seem rather arrogent. A C152 with 20 flap is in the approach config and with 30 flap in the landing config.
As for spinning they are very easy to spin (however they do need aggresive handling at stall)
As for your comments generally I do not think my instructor or examiner would agree with you.
JWF
Guest
Posts: n/a
JWF & AoA - I worked for Rex Aviation (the Australian distributor of Cessnas)for 10 years as an instructor, amongst various other things like charter.
I also was one of the test pilots they had - I have carried out over 140 initial test flights on Cessna 150/152 type aircraft. About the same number for the rest of the fleet from 188's right though to 210's etc.
In the case of the 150/152's, part of the test regime was to spin each one - several times & note the characteristics.
As I do not hold the latest bunch of examiners in any high regard, I suggest my practical knoweldge of spinning 150/152's is far greater than most.
Add to that I have 4,500hrs instructional experience in 150/152's - can your present instructor or examiner match that sort of experience.
If I seem arogant, in regards to this topic, so be it. I have done an enormous amount of work in Cessnas during my lifetime.
I was also an ATO for many years & the standard of manipulative skills & theoretical knoweldge I see today worries me.
The arguement as to what is considered a stall in the 'approach' configuration vs 'landing' configuration is exactly the type of 'hair splitting' that takes the real debate out of aviation theses days.
I was taught that the last stage of the approach, ie with full flap, was the stall to be practiced- but I suppose after 30 odd years definitions have changed - called 'dumbing down'!!
------------------
Lux Lucidum Lucidentes
I also was one of the test pilots they had - I have carried out over 140 initial test flights on Cessna 150/152 type aircraft. About the same number for the rest of the fleet from 188's right though to 210's etc.
In the case of the 150/152's, part of the test regime was to spin each one - several times & note the characteristics.
As I do not hold the latest bunch of examiners in any high regard, I suggest my practical knoweldge of spinning 150/152's is far greater than most.
Add to that I have 4,500hrs instructional experience in 150/152's - can your present instructor or examiner match that sort of experience.
If I seem arogant, in regards to this topic, so be it. I have done an enormous amount of work in Cessnas during my lifetime.
I was also an ATO for many years & the standard of manipulative skills & theoretical knoweldge I see today worries me.
The arguement as to what is considered a stall in the 'approach' configuration vs 'landing' configuration is exactly the type of 'hair splitting' that takes the real debate out of aviation theses days.
I was taught that the last stage of the approach, ie with full flap, was the stall to be practiced- but I suppose after 30 odd years definitions have changed - called 'dumbing down'!!
------------------
Lux Lucidum Lucidentes
Guest
Posts: n/a
I teach spins primarily for aerobatics. Of the aircraft I spin most commonly - Tiger Moth, YAK-52 and a basic trainer Beechcraft Skipper, I find the spin entry in the Skipper most hairy - not something that one wants to introduce a low hours pilot to!
Of course, open up the taps and outspin aileron and the YAK bites back !
I have introduced a couple of students to the approach configuration spin - ones that were reasonable pilots but turned out of balance - their turns were much improved after the session - and they still wanted to fly with me !
Of course, open up the taps and outspin aileron and the YAK bites back !
I have introduced a couple of students to the approach configuration spin - ones that were reasonable pilots but turned out of balance - their turns were much improved after the session - and they still wanted to fly with me !
Guest
Posts: n/a
If you're going to teach spinning, you need to do it properly. Not demonstrate one, direct one and monitor one. You'll end up at best with a frightened student who really didn't have a clue what was going on or at worst with somebody who thinks they know what is going on and really didn't have aclue what was going on. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I have to wonder how many students did the absolute minimum as per the regulations in the old days and have never done one since.
As for spin training saving a guy who crosses the controls at low level. Forget it.
Teach good recognition of the approaching stall, good understanding of the contributing factors to a stall/spin and if a student is keen teach them spin revoveries, but don't expect to do it in one or even two or three sessions. And ultimately, is there any point in teaching spin recovery if the student is not subsequently stay current? I think not.
As for spin training saving a guy who crosses the controls at low level. Forget it.
Teach good recognition of the approaching stall, good understanding of the contributing factors to a stall/spin and if a student is keen teach them spin revoveries, but don't expect to do it in one or even two or three sessions. And ultimately, is there any point in teaching spin recovery if the student is not subsequently stay current? I think not.