Spin Recovery
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some, if not all, of the Cherokee brigade are not allowed to spin, with good reason, but should recover with enough height, and the correct technique if applied correctly.
)I believe the taper wing birds are not certified for spins though.
Beech
G-KEST, I don't know about you, but having read some of the replies on this thread, it surprises me that there aren't more stall/spin accidents.
I do hope that FI schools have stopped teaching people to use rudder at the point of stall for anything other than maintaining balanced flight.
That C152 scenario described by Troy McLure is truly alarming - as you say, it's not surprising that he frightened himself. The aircraft has stalled with flap extended, so retracting the flap would certainly delay recovery - large rudder angles and a sudden change in airflow due to the change in power setting would virtually guarantee a departure.
Most modern GA aircraft (not the 'exotics') are bred with benign handling characteristics. In that C152 scenario, which sounds more like a mishandled fully developed stall in the final turn than an incipient spin, I would personally have carried out standard stall recovery.
However, to set up such a situation deliberately is inviting disaster - emphasis should surely be on recovering long before the departure is enountered.
I do hope that FI schools have stopped teaching people to use rudder at the point of stall for anything other than maintaining balanced flight.
That C152 scenario described by Troy McLure is truly alarming - as you say, it's not surprising that he frightened himself. The aircraft has stalled with flap extended, so retracting the flap would certainly delay recovery - large rudder angles and a sudden change in airflow due to the change in power setting would virtually guarantee a departure.
Most modern GA aircraft (not the 'exotics') are bred with benign handling characteristics. In that C152 scenario, which sounds more like a mishandled fully developed stall in the final turn than an incipient spin, I would personally have carried out standard stall recovery.
However, to set up such a situation deliberately is inviting disaster - emphasis should surely be on recovering long before the departure is enountered.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not an instructor, but having read many of the replies on here all I can think is that it's about time experienced PPL's were once again allowed to get their FI rating and teach! You can certainly tell the instructors who've been around a long time from those trained in the last ten years or so.
I'd also recommend that a bit of gliding is worthwhile to any pilot as spinning is still a requirement before solo there. Whilst there is obviously no throttle, and recovery is nicely predictable in comparison to light aircraft, the aerodynamic principals are the same ... ie use rudder to prevent yaw, not to pick up wings, stop incipent spins or paddle for good measure
SS
PS ... I forgot this bit
Is that right? I thought all normal aircraft had to prove capable of spin recovery in order to gain approval? I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable flying something that was approved with the knowledge that it couldn't recover and relied on a parachute
I'd also recommend that a bit of gliding is worthwhile to any pilot as spinning is still a requirement before solo there. Whilst there is obviously no throttle, and recovery is nicely predictable in comparison to light aircraft, the aerodynamic principals are the same ... ie use rudder to prevent yaw, not to pick up wings, stop incipent spins or paddle for good measure
SS
PS ... I forgot this bit
On a side note, the Cirrus SR22 flight manual does basically say to let go and pull the airframe parachute, that is the only approved spin recovery for that aircraft.
Awesome but Affordable
BEagle,
I too have been amazed at some of the lack of basic knowledge shown in many of the posts on this thread. It really is a sad comment on the current state of the art in flying training.
Perhaps this thread should be "stickied" since it merits study in future by all inexperienced pilots, private or indeed professional. The knowledge gained just might save their necks when "le merde frappez l'helice............!!!!!!!!!!!!".
Cheers,
Trapper 69
I too have been amazed at some of the lack of basic knowledge shown in many of the posts on this thread. It really is a sad comment on the current state of the art in flying training.
Perhaps this thread should be "stickied" since it merits study in future by all inexperienced pilots, private or indeed professional. The knowledge gained just might save their necks when "le merde frappez l'helice............!!!!!!!!!!!!".
Cheers,
Trapper 69
Out of curiousity: do the advocates of spin training also advocate wearing parachutes (and commencing the spin from such a height that a successful bale out can be achieved,) or not? That's not a leading question, I'm just curious what the concensus is (though being an ex-Bulldog pilot, I'm sure Beagle can see where I'm coming from!)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not suggesting we bring spinning formally back (too many unsuitable training aircraft in use for a start). However, I do kind of feel that instructors should know what they are talking about when a student asks about spinning (and even more so if teaching spin recovery) 
SS
SS
Awesome but Affordable
212man,
In the absence of any legal requirement in the UK for parachutes to be worn it is purely a matter of personal preference. A situation unlike that in the USA where there is no legal option but to wear one if it is a dual trip involving spinning or aerobatics.
In some aircraft it is difficult to imagine just how one might manage to abandon the machine in an expeditious manner. In some the physical space available means that parachutes could not be worn and MTOM considerations might well come into it.
When the day comes and it is a requirement to fit a total emergency parachute recovery system to our beloved Skybolt I sincerely trust my personal involvement in general aviation, display flying and aerobatics will be over. I doubt if angels wear parachutes in the event of wing failure and if, as may be likely, I wind up in the other place then such a device is not likely to assist a stoker.......!!!!!
Cheers,
Trapper 69
PS - I bought a new Strong Systems seat pack parachute in the States a couple of years ago while at Oshkosh and have yet to wear it. This despite doing lots of flying since it was acquired. I really must be mad.
In the absence of any legal requirement in the UK for parachutes to be worn it is purely a matter of personal preference. A situation unlike that in the USA where there is no legal option but to wear one if it is a dual trip involving spinning or aerobatics.
In some aircraft it is difficult to imagine just how one might manage to abandon the machine in an expeditious manner. In some the physical space available means that parachutes could not be worn and MTOM considerations might well come into it.
When the day comes and it is a requirement to fit a total emergency parachute recovery system to our beloved Skybolt I sincerely trust my personal involvement in general aviation, display flying and aerobatics will be over. I doubt if angels wear parachutes in the event of wing failure and if, as may be likely, I wind up in the other place then such a device is not likely to assist a stoker.......!!!!!
Cheers,
Trapper 69
PS - I bought a new Strong Systems seat pack parachute in the States a couple of years ago while at Oshkosh and have yet to wear it. This despite doing lots of flying since it was acquired. I really must be mad.
212man: absolutely! (assuming 'chutes can be worn in the aircraft) And brief the abandonment procedure and heights on the ground and at TOC.
SS: agreed.
HFD
SS: agreed.
HFD
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: ...back of the drag curve
Age: 61
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle wrote:
At last, a voice of reason..........
Far too many 'pilots' are being given licenses when they should really be taking up another hobby, like fishing or golf. And how many are being taught by the very 'instructors' who don't fully understand what they are teaching.... Like a fair few posters here it seems.
NO!! Teach them properly - or not at all!
If they can't cope, keep at it until they can. Or tell the little blighters to take up another hobby!
If they can't cope, keep at it until they can. Or tell the little blighters to take up another hobby!
Far too many 'pilots' are being given licenses when they should really be taking up another hobby, like fishing or golf. And how many are being taught by the very 'instructors' who don't fully understand what they are teaching.... Like a fair few posters here it seems.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 52
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do kind of feel that instructors should know what they are talking about when a student asks about spinning (and even more so if teaching spin recovery)
Dare I say it but lack of knowledge with reference to spin recovery et al may be a symptom that the "wrinklies" have sadly died off. I am referring to those very experienced FIC instructors (mostly ex service CFS or even EFTS) who were brought up on a/c like Magisters, Tiger Moths and Chipmunks. They knew all too well the consequences of not getting this exercise right.
I am biased but my late father Hector used to wax lyrical about spinning the Magister and how important it was to apply the correct recovery and so long as you did so there was no problem.
We now have a generation of pilots who have never really ever flown aircraft with classic spin properties.
I am totally with Beagle on this - either teach them properly or not at all!
I am biased but my late father Hector used to wax lyrical about spinning the Magister and how important it was to apply the correct recovery and so long as you did so there was no problem.
We now have a generation of pilots who have never really ever flown aircraft with classic spin properties.
I am totally with Beagle on this - either teach them properly or not at all!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FI Training & Testing
I've attended a number of two day Instructor renewal seminars over recent years. I'm always amazed how often the rudder is ommited from the briefs given by those leading the seminars; attaining S & L flight on instruments and even worse recovering from the spin, for example.
Only recently an aspiring FI asked me for advice on what he should prepare, briefing wise, for his test. I suggested that he should prepare a long brief on the forces in the turn and also similar for the climb and be able to explain a spin but be prepared across the board. He telephoned his examiner to discover if he could pre-prepare a particular brief and was told to pick any subject he wished - he chose 'the onset and passage of a cold front' which was accepted.
What hope is there if such cop outs are common - I don't know if this is usual now?
Only recently an aspiring FI asked me for advice on what he should prepare, briefing wise, for his test. I suggested that he should prepare a long brief on the forces in the turn and also similar for the climb and be able to explain a spin but be prepared across the board. He telephoned his examiner to discover if he could pre-prepare a particular brief and was told to pick any subject he wished - he chose 'the onset and passage of a cold front' which was accepted.
What hope is there if such cop outs are common - I don't know if this is usual now?
Awesome but Affordable
fireflybob,
How I miss your dad. Hector was the FIE that let me through the golden gates into instructing in powered aeroplanes back in 1960. A most courteous man and a superb instructor. His ability to put a nervous candidate at their ease was quite phenominal " Do have a cup of tea my boy....!!!" was his usual opening gambit and it just flowed from then on.
It was December and the early onset of darkness meant an enforced overnight stay after the flying element of my AFI initial test in the Tiger Moth from Little Snoring. We moved on to the ground technical syllabus in more congenial surroundings. I swear he had totally emptied my knowledge tank after an hour or so that evening while sitting in an armchair at your West Bridgeford home. He had collected me from my B&B and delivered me back some four hours later. The last couple of hours were filled with priceless gems of instructional technique from him along with tales of his wartime involvement with CFS. This included writing the CFS bible on elementary flying training, a textbook used right across the Empire Flying Training Schools world wide. He drove me out to Tollerton the following morning and even swung the prop on the Tiger. It was a very happy camper that flew back home to Norfolk on a cold and frosty morning.
He was the person that encouraged me to accept the invitation to join the Panel of Examiners back in 1972. I thoroughly enjoyed being the very first non-service trained instructor to be appointed as a civil trapper. Particularly so because the RAF medics in 1954 had firmly stated that having monaural hearing would prevent me from being either a service or a civilian pilot. Now some 53 years on and with over 13,000 hours in the logbooks I look back on that with some amusement.
Hector continued to be my personal FIE on many occasions and I always came away, not only with a renewed rating, but with some priceless bit of his instructional technique to improve my own ability to teach.
On a few occasions when we were doing the test in a Chipmunk he would act the ham fisted student and turn a grotty loop into a full flick at the top before completing the loop. When I criticised the figure on the basis of it being either an inadequate loop or, alternatively, a poorly executed avalanche he seemed quite hurt. I never quite knew if he was pulling my leg.
Perhaps when I eventually shuffle off the mortal coil we may meet again. We will not be short of discussion points. This thread may well provide a few.
In my experience if you get two instructors together you might have a discussion. Three and it will become an argument. Four and over means a riot will follow. I do hope Saint Peter, or perhaps the chief stoker, can sort that out amicably.
Hector, it was indeed a priviledge to have known you. Rest in Peace. You surely deserve to.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
How I miss your dad. Hector was the FIE that let me through the golden gates into instructing in powered aeroplanes back in 1960. A most courteous man and a superb instructor. His ability to put a nervous candidate at their ease was quite phenominal " Do have a cup of tea my boy....!!!" was his usual opening gambit and it just flowed from then on.
It was December and the early onset of darkness meant an enforced overnight stay after the flying element of my AFI initial test in the Tiger Moth from Little Snoring. We moved on to the ground technical syllabus in more congenial surroundings. I swear he had totally emptied my knowledge tank after an hour or so that evening while sitting in an armchair at your West Bridgeford home. He had collected me from my B&B and delivered me back some four hours later. The last couple of hours were filled with priceless gems of instructional technique from him along with tales of his wartime involvement with CFS. This included writing the CFS bible on elementary flying training, a textbook used right across the Empire Flying Training Schools world wide. He drove me out to Tollerton the following morning and even swung the prop on the Tiger. It was a very happy camper that flew back home to Norfolk on a cold and frosty morning.
He was the person that encouraged me to accept the invitation to join the Panel of Examiners back in 1972. I thoroughly enjoyed being the very first non-service trained instructor to be appointed as a civil trapper. Particularly so because the RAF medics in 1954 had firmly stated that having monaural hearing would prevent me from being either a service or a civilian pilot. Now some 53 years on and with over 13,000 hours in the logbooks I look back on that with some amusement.
Hector continued to be my personal FIE on many occasions and I always came away, not only with a renewed rating, but with some priceless bit of his instructional technique to improve my own ability to teach.
On a few occasions when we were doing the test in a Chipmunk he would act the ham fisted student and turn a grotty loop into a full flick at the top before completing the loop. When I criticised the figure on the basis of it being either an inadequate loop or, alternatively, a poorly executed avalanche he seemed quite hurt. I never quite knew if he was pulling my leg.
Perhaps when I eventually shuffle off the mortal coil we may meet again. We will not be short of discussion points. This thread may well provide a few.
In my experience if you get two instructors together you might have a discussion. Three and it will become an argument. Four and over means a riot will follow. I do hope Saint Peter, or perhaps the chief stoker, can sort that out amicably.
Hector, it was indeed a priviledge to have known you. Rest in Peace. You surely deserve to.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
After such a wonderful eulogy I hesitate to comment on the original post but this spinning thing interests me...
I'm a PPL who's considering doing a CPL and who has never spun an aircraft, deliberately or otherwise (thank gawd!). In this country it's not taught at PPL or CPL level but there is a brief 1-hr requirement for an initial FI license.
However, being the type I am, I think it's important to at least know about such things in case it should ever happen. Unfortunately I'm also a little inclined to get a bit green, even in max-rate turns, so the thought of it alone is enough to give me the shivers. That said I'm going to force myself to take some instruction sometime soon but what I'd like to know is, roughly, how fast is a spin in something like a 150/152? I mean does it spin faster than your average merry-go-round (
!) or are they a fairly gentle thing? I guess I feel I could cope better with the latter!
So far the discussion has been of quite some value - amongst other things the amount of height one could lose even in a simple training exercise was an eye-opener
I'm a PPL who's considering doing a CPL and who has never spun an aircraft, deliberately or otherwise (thank gawd!). In this country it's not taught at PPL or CPL level but there is a brief 1-hr requirement for an initial FI license.
However, being the type I am, I think it's important to at least know about such things in case it should ever happen. Unfortunately I'm also a little inclined to get a bit green, even in max-rate turns, so the thought of it alone is enough to give me the shivers. That said I'm going to force myself to take some instruction sometime soon but what I'd like to know is, roughly, how fast is a spin in something like a 150/152? I mean does it spin faster than your average merry-go-round (
!) or are they a fairly gentle thing? I guess I feel I could cope better with the latter!So far the discussion has been of quite some value - amongst other things the amount of height one could lose even in a simple training exercise was an eye-opener
First_Principal:
A C152 spin (providing you hold full aft stick, pro-spin rudder and power off) is reasonably sedate, but there are better aircraft in which to learn about spinning. The Bulldog, T67 & CAP10 can all be flown with 'chutes, require correct inputs to recover, and have sufficient ROC to get back up to start the next one at a safe height in a reasonable time.
If you're really concerned about being ill (many people go through this feeling, but there's invariably light at the end of the tunnel) you could go to a gliding club and ask them to teach you spin recoveries in something like a K13 or K21 (or, if you're lucky, a Puchacz), Gliders generally have a "gentler" spin than light aircraft and are designed to be flown with parachutes.
Height loss depends on the type (of aircraft and spin) but, once developed, assume 200-350ft/turn and about 0.5-2 turns/second for a rough guesstimate of the ROD.
Finally, I'd recommend using an FI who teaches aerobatics; sadly not all FIs are experienced at teaching spin recoveries.
I guarantee you'll enjoy and benefit from the training, so go for it!
HFD
A C152 spin (providing you hold full aft stick, pro-spin rudder and power off) is reasonably sedate, but there are better aircraft in which to learn about spinning. The Bulldog, T67 & CAP10 can all be flown with 'chutes, require correct inputs to recover, and have sufficient ROC to get back up to start the next one at a safe height in a reasonable time.
If you're really concerned about being ill (many people go through this feeling, but there's invariably light at the end of the tunnel) you could go to a gliding club and ask them to teach you spin recoveries in something like a K13 or K21 (or, if you're lucky, a Puchacz), Gliders generally have a "gentler" spin than light aircraft and are designed to be flown with parachutes.
Height loss depends on the type (of aircraft and spin) but, once developed, assume 200-350ft/turn and about 0.5-2 turns/second for a rough guesstimate of the ROD.
Finally, I'd recommend using an FI who teaches aerobatics; sadly not all FIs are experienced at teaching spin recoveries.
I guarantee you'll enjoy and benefit from the training, so go for it!
HFD
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: West Britain
Age: 74
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I started instructing, spinning was still part of the PPL syllabus and some students, naturally, had a certain degree of trepidation about the thing, often fuelled by war stories in the club bar. My approach was that it was merely Exercise 11 in a series of 18 and part of the process of becoming a pilot. Briefed and executed in a calm manner, most students actually ended up enjoying the experience, particularly the fact that they proved to themselves that they could recover the aeroplane from the edge of the envelope. That, together with the demonstration that even the most docile machine will bite if mishandled, made it an invaluable teaching aid and turned out, in my opinion, better pilots. They certainly appreciated why we then continuously exercised them in stall recovery at the incipient stage.
All the advanced stuff about flat/inverted spins was and is totally irrelevant to the PPL student, albeit essential if an aeros course is envisaged.
Incidentally, I was amazed at a recent Instructor Seminar where they were preaching a spin recovery technique where the first action was check flaps up. Fumble, fumble, high ROD, splat!
All the advanced stuff about flat/inverted spins was and is totally irrelevant to the PPL student, albeit essential if an aeros course is envisaged.
Incidentally, I was amazed at a recent Instructor Seminar where they were preaching a spin recovery technique where the first action was check flaps up. Fumble, fumble, high ROD, splat!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"We now have a generation of pilots who have never really ever flown aircraft with classic spin properties.
I am totally with Beagle on this - either teach them properly or not at all!"
Absolutely spot-on FB!
One of the problems of being a "wrinkly" is that conversations with the smooth-visaged tend to elicit rather uncomprehending responses as the latter don't know what the hell you are talking about! Sadly, this includes the subject of spinning.
I may have suggested this before but I feel it a little facile to be critical of FIs whose knowledge/understanding/experience of this subject is not up to the same level of their instructing in other subjects. I suspect this arises not from lack of interest but lack of opportunity.
This thread has made me aware of how lucky us wrinklies have been. Not until recently did I see anything remarkable in having started aerobatics in a Stampe S4, finishing with a Zlin 526 and taking in things like the Jungmann and Arrow Active along the way. These and similar aircraft were readily available (well, not the Active) 40/50 years ago and were rather taken for granted. Now they are gone; into the ground or an air-conditioned hangar. So where is the FI to find the experience to "teach them properly"?
If the CAA, or whoever the governing body in the UK might be, were to reinstate spins to the syllabus, there might be an additional incentive to put things like the Victa Airtourer back into production and, once more, everyone could safely engage in this interesting and fun aspect of flight.
GQ.
I bags the Ercoupe . . . .
I am totally with Beagle on this - either teach them properly or not at all!"
Absolutely spot-on FB!
One of the problems of being a "wrinkly" is that conversations with the smooth-visaged tend to elicit rather uncomprehending responses as the latter don't know what the hell you are talking about! Sadly, this includes the subject of spinning.
I may have suggested this before but I feel it a little facile to be critical of FIs whose knowledge/understanding/experience of this subject is not up to the same level of their instructing in other subjects. I suspect this arises not from lack of interest but lack of opportunity.
This thread has made me aware of how lucky us wrinklies have been. Not until recently did I see anything remarkable in having started aerobatics in a Stampe S4, finishing with a Zlin 526 and taking in things like the Jungmann and Arrow Active along the way. These and similar aircraft were readily available (well, not the Active) 40/50 years ago and were rather taken for granted. Now they are gone; into the ground or an air-conditioned hangar. So where is the FI to find the experience to "teach them properly"?
If the CAA, or whoever the governing body in the UK might be, were to reinstate spins to the syllabus, there might be an additional incentive to put things like the Victa Airtourer back into production and, once more, everyone could safely engage in this interesting and fun aspect of flight.
GQ.
I bags the Ercoupe . . . .
Hi Guys, thanks for the input - my reason for being interested particularly in the 150/152 response is that I own one, so obviously it would be natural for me to use that for the lesson. However if there's something better then I'm more than happy to fly that. We don't have the machines you mentioned but there is a (Super)Cub I fly a bit, and a 172, both of which are rated for spinning. If anyone has a comment on these versus the 150 I'd be pleased to hear it. Gliders are a more remote possibility (they used to fly from my usual field but no longer).
Also quite agree with your comments re the instructor; there's a couple of chaps who have a lot of experience in this sort of thing and I intend to ask one of them. Not only do I want the best teaching possible but I'm reasonably keen to be alive at the end of it and I need someone who's not going to 'show me what this thing will do'
Given my trepidation I think I'll definately keep it to 'basic' spins, I'm certainly not an aero kinda guy :-) Perhaps it's something to do with my first flight (in a glider) when I was around 14 or 15 yrs old and the pilot decided he would show me what the thing would do... I've had some interesting Pavlovian responses to things ever since
Also quite agree with your comments re the instructor; there's a couple of chaps who have a lot of experience in this sort of thing and I intend to ask one of them. Not only do I want the best teaching possible but I'm reasonably keen to be alive at the end of it and I need someone who's not going to 'show me what this thing will do'
Given my trepidation I think I'll definately keep it to 'basic' spins, I'm certainly not an aero kinda guy :-) Perhaps it's something to do with my first flight (in a glider) when I was around 14 or 15 yrs old and the pilot decided he would show me what the thing would do... I've had some interesting Pavlovian responses to things ever since
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Austria
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fun with C152 Aerobat
Hi there,
I joined this forum because i found this discussion about spin recovery quite interesting. I would like to add my own experience with a C152 Aerobat. I have about 500 Hours on this particular Cesna with about 200 hours of aerobatics.
One interesting thing I found that in contrast to the theory the ailerons work quite well in very slow flight. It is possible to fly this Cesna at 35 to 38 Knots IAS at 6000 Feet while maintaining course and altitude. Probably this is possible with any C152 but I have not tried on a different one. The controls feel very weak at this speed but I found that it is very easy to keep the wings level by using the ailerons. When I learned to fly, I was told to use only the rudder at very slow speed because use of ailerons might stall the wing where the aileron is deflecting downward. This would cause the wing to drop. So I tried full and abrupt aileron deflections at 38 Knots and found out that the ailerons work exactly as they should. To take it further I tried to keep the wings level with ruder deflections alone and found that it works but that you have to be careful. I full deflection of left or right rudder will throw my Cesna into a spin after 1 or 2 seconds, which is no surprise.
I then tried full ruder deflections and just as the aircraft started to drop into a spin full aileron in the opposite direction without any change on the elevator. According to the theory I was told this should be a very bad Idea. But it works. At least in the Cesna I fly it is possible to keep the wings level with the aileron even if full ruder is held. Remember I am flying at 38 Knots which is a little below the nominal 1G Stall speed. Sounds strange but I tried it many times and it works perfectly.
I also tried a lot of different Spin Variants. I found out that if you do no more than 2 ½ revolutions it is possible to stop the spin in many different ways:
1) Normal Spin recovery
2) Release all controls and take your feet of the rudder.
3) Only Rudder against the spin direction with elevator full aft.
4) Only release the elevator and keep the rudder full into spin direction.
5) Very strange: Keep elevator pulled and rudder in spin direction and add full aileron against spin direction. This should definitely not work. According to the theory the Cesna should start an oscillating up/down nose movement or enter a flat spin. My Cesna does not. After 2-3 additional revolutions the spin stops even with full pro spin controls held.
To make it clear: I am not suggesting the use the aileron for spin recovery. I am just describing my experience in one Cesna C152.
Another thing a found is that use of aileron in spin direction results in a very steep and fast spin. This spin is recoverable with the normal recovery technique but you have to be sure to neutralize the aileron first. Because of the high rate of rotation the recovery takes up to 3 revolutions in my cesna but there is pressure on the controls and the rotation starts to slow as soon as you start the recovery.
Until now all spins I described where with power at idle. An altogether different spin results when you do 3 or more revolutions with full power. The nose starts to come up after 1 ½ revolutions and is very high up after 3 revolutions. I don’t know if this is a flat spin or just a flatter mode of a normal spin. What I do know is that this spin is stable. The airplane does not recover by itself when you cut the power and release the controls. It also does not recover when you release the elevator/aileron and push full ruder against spin direction. There are to recovery techniques a found that work:
1) Rudder against the spin direction and elevator full forward and wait for at least 5 revolutions. Be sure to cut the power first. My Cesna is absolutely unrecoverable with full power.
2) Keep Ruder in Spin direction and Elevator pulled and add full aileron in spin direction. The nose drops after ½ to one revolutions and the plane enters a normal spin. Then neutralize the aileron and use a normal spin recovery. It is important that the aileron is neutralized as soon as the nose is down. Otherwise the airplane enters the accelerated steep spin I described above.
I am quite sure that different airplanes would react in a different way to the same control inputs. If you want to repeat my experiments I would suggest that you climb very high before you start. I also would suggest that you look into the cockpit to make sure that you put the controls where you want them. It is not easy to keep the ailerons neutral in a fast rotating aircraft. And I would suggest that you do not try any of this unless you are an experienced aerobatic pilot with enough experience on a Cesna.
I would agree to some posters who recommend adding power after the recovery to reduce the altitude loss for the pull out. But according to my experience it is very important to cut the power as soon as there is the possibility of a spin. The flatter spin of my Cesna would definitely be too much for a beginner.
Crazy Cesna
I joined this forum because i found this discussion about spin recovery quite interesting. I would like to add my own experience with a C152 Aerobat. I have about 500 Hours on this particular Cesna with about 200 hours of aerobatics.
One interesting thing I found that in contrast to the theory the ailerons work quite well in very slow flight. It is possible to fly this Cesna at 35 to 38 Knots IAS at 6000 Feet while maintaining course and altitude. Probably this is possible with any C152 but I have not tried on a different one. The controls feel very weak at this speed but I found that it is very easy to keep the wings level by using the ailerons. When I learned to fly, I was told to use only the rudder at very slow speed because use of ailerons might stall the wing where the aileron is deflecting downward. This would cause the wing to drop. So I tried full and abrupt aileron deflections at 38 Knots and found out that the ailerons work exactly as they should. To take it further I tried to keep the wings level with ruder deflections alone and found that it works but that you have to be careful. I full deflection of left or right rudder will throw my Cesna into a spin after 1 or 2 seconds, which is no surprise.
I then tried full ruder deflections and just as the aircraft started to drop into a spin full aileron in the opposite direction without any change on the elevator. According to the theory I was told this should be a very bad Idea. But it works. At least in the Cesna I fly it is possible to keep the wings level with the aileron even if full ruder is held. Remember I am flying at 38 Knots which is a little below the nominal 1G Stall speed. Sounds strange but I tried it many times and it works perfectly.
I also tried a lot of different Spin Variants. I found out that if you do no more than 2 ½ revolutions it is possible to stop the spin in many different ways:
1) Normal Spin recovery
2) Release all controls and take your feet of the rudder.
3) Only Rudder against the spin direction with elevator full aft.
4) Only release the elevator and keep the rudder full into spin direction.
5) Very strange: Keep elevator pulled and rudder in spin direction and add full aileron against spin direction. This should definitely not work. According to the theory the Cesna should start an oscillating up/down nose movement or enter a flat spin. My Cesna does not. After 2-3 additional revolutions the spin stops even with full pro spin controls held.
To make it clear: I am not suggesting the use the aileron for spin recovery. I am just describing my experience in one Cesna C152.
Another thing a found is that use of aileron in spin direction results in a very steep and fast spin. This spin is recoverable with the normal recovery technique but you have to be sure to neutralize the aileron first. Because of the high rate of rotation the recovery takes up to 3 revolutions in my cesna but there is pressure on the controls and the rotation starts to slow as soon as you start the recovery.
Until now all spins I described where with power at idle. An altogether different spin results when you do 3 or more revolutions with full power. The nose starts to come up after 1 ½ revolutions and is very high up after 3 revolutions. I don’t know if this is a flat spin or just a flatter mode of a normal spin. What I do know is that this spin is stable. The airplane does not recover by itself when you cut the power and release the controls. It also does not recover when you release the elevator/aileron and push full ruder against spin direction. There are to recovery techniques a found that work:
1) Rudder against the spin direction and elevator full forward and wait for at least 5 revolutions. Be sure to cut the power first. My Cesna is absolutely unrecoverable with full power.
2) Keep Ruder in Spin direction and Elevator pulled and add full aileron in spin direction. The nose drops after ½ to one revolutions and the plane enters a normal spin. Then neutralize the aileron and use a normal spin recovery. It is important that the aileron is neutralized as soon as the nose is down. Otherwise the airplane enters the accelerated steep spin I described above.
I am quite sure that different airplanes would react in a different way to the same control inputs. If you want to repeat my experiments I would suggest that you climb very high before you start. I also would suggest that you look into the cockpit to make sure that you put the controls where you want them. It is not easy to keep the ailerons neutral in a fast rotating aircraft. And I would suggest that you do not try any of this unless you are an experienced aerobatic pilot with enough experience on a Cesna.
I would agree to some posters who recommend adding power after the recovery to reduce the altitude loss for the pull out. But according to my experience it is very important to cut the power as soon as there is the possibility of a spin. The flatter spin of my Cesna would definitely be too much for a beginner.
Crazy Cesna