Ex 10a/b/11 Slow Flight/ Stalling/Spin Avoidance

[llanfairpg]

But all of that can be covered in other exercises.

[FlyingForFun]

But would covering it in other lessons not gloss over it, without imparting its importance to students???

(I don't know the answer, it's just a question to debate.)

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

[llanfairpg]

FFF

I know what you mean, thats why i asked the original question but looking at the answers I cannot see any reason for me changing so far but you may be right I may be glossing over it. I think i have an aversion to RC as an instructor(not as a person) and thats never helped

[TheOddOne]

I think i have an aversion to RC as an instructor(not as a person) and thats never helped

Yes, I can see how that might be getting in the way.

Now, as I've said elsewhere, I've only relatively recently done the FIC and have only taught slow flight and stalling a few times so far. However, I did my original PPL right on the cusp of the change from spin training to incipient stage avoidance (in fact we did both, just to be sure we'd covered all bases) so I can see the history of how we've arrived at what we're doing today.

On the FIC, due to the way the weather was at the time, we didn't sequence the slow flight, then stalling, but with other exercies in between. As was put at the time 'you probably won't have the luxury of teaching them to the same student in sequence' though so far, I have.

I consider that slow flight in my limited experience, should be briefied and then taught as a lesson on its own, followed as soon as practicable by the first of the stalling lessons. I've taken the opportunity to practice/polish climbing and descending with better heading control etc on the way out and back, along with a bit of consolidation of local landmarks and rejoin procedures and radio practice.

I like to think that the few folk I've done stalling with have approached it with much less trepidation after the slow flight lesson than they might otherwise and have also controlled the entry to the stall regime much better.

Just my view,

TheOddOne

[llanfairpg]

Thanks your comments are noted

[gulfairs]

slow flight

Have a look at slow flight as it will be done in nz and the world will learn from us that invent the wheel on a daily basis!

http://www.caa.govt.nz/pilots/Proposal-Slow_Flight.pdf

This is to be examined, during a BFR and a Type ratings, and any time a big headed(small brain all bone) Instructor decides that it will be done or checked.(Once it is in legislation)

There has been a spate of climbing turn after takeoff accidents in NZ and indeed they have had fatal results.

But to grab the wrong end of the stick and interpret the FAA system of chandelles as a compulsory exercise, but done in the NZ way VSmin +5kts for CPL and VSmin + 10 for PPL in an aircraft at close to maximum all up weight, is a dopey exercise.
VSmin x 1.3 should be taught and practiced, but below this velocity, unless it is the best angle of climb speed, should be avoided at all times.

Bad weather(poor met) slow flying is a great exercise and particularly if carried out at 300ft agl, to simulate trying to creep back after getting caught.

But to bu***er around inside the buffet zone with a horn blowing or stall warning lite on, should only be shown as a "How to get out of this corner " exersize.

AMEN

bbg

[barit1]

When I took my instructor exam, more than a few decades ago, I demonstrated a chandelle as a max. performance manuver - i.e. rollling wings level just as the aircraft was beginning to burble pre-stall. This was the way several instructors had taught me, including Dad who had instructed in AT-6's. Stall warners were non-existent in many aircraft at that time.

But my examiner didn't like that one bit - he said the stall warner (C-172) should only be occasionally beeping as I rolled out. I said "Can I try it your way?" - and I did to his satisfaction. Maybe he was just looking at my ability to adapt to a different style manuver - in any case I passed the exam.

[rotorfossil]

It's is interesting to interpret the underlying psychology of the current training ideas. In the training ethos many years ago, stalling was considered as just another phase of flight and practiced from all sorts of attitudes, with/without flaps, power on/off, in turns etc. Spinning was then the big deal and approached with trepidation. Now spinning is not taught, stalling has become the bogey exercise. Is there a lesson there somewhere that anything which is not practiced much and with the inference that "here be tigers" is actually the problem?

[Say again s l o w l y]

One thing we need to do as FI's is to make sure that our students aren't scared by operating the aircraft.

I've always found slow flight to be a great way to teach handling ability and to breed confidence whilst demonstrating that the machine won't just fall out of the air when the speed is lower then normal cruise.

I don't just use speed conbtrol in a single lesson. I bring it in at all sorts of points, so people don't just use the "standard" power setting all the times without thought. That way they actually get an understanding of how the machine behaves and the difference between individual a/c.

Some good stuff on here, but there really is no need to complicate matters. As long as we get across the ability to fly the aircraft at slow speeds safely and what is actually happening, then job done. When, where and how is irrelevant really.

[Robin Pilot]

At the school I attend (yes I'm a student - reading this part of pprune as I get much valuable info from you guys) - spinning is part of the ab-initio training. Students going out to the training area solo and practising spins is on the syllabus and assesed for the GFPT test. Then again we're in fully aerobatic Robins - so we're not crumpling expensive airframes in the process. Personally, I'd much rather practice spin entry/exit and be confident performing them than trying to remember the "advice without demonstration and practice" when the poo hits the fan in FL situation.

There was a death here recently where a student from another school spinned his way to terra firma after an engine failure. Sure - it's more important to teach how to not get into a spin - but I reckon it's very good practice to rehearse the exit of a spin also.

[what next]

Hello!

Sure - it's more important to teach how to not get into a spin - but I reckon it's very good practice to rehearse the exit of a spin also.

I disagree. (And with me the writers of most training syllabi of the last 50 years...). You might be able to get your training aeroplane out of a spin during the first year after your course. But thereafter, this ability becomes gradually lost due to lack of training. And what worked fine on your trainig aeroplane might not work so fine on the aeroplane that you will fly once you have your license. Anyway, considering that most spinning accidents occur at very low level - usually at traffic pattern altitude or below - spin recovery practise is not something that is ever going to save anybody.

Greetings, Max

[Robin Pilot]

I take your point whatnext - but you haven't said anything to support the theory of not practising the technique.

I disagree that you'd suddenly forget the skill - especially if it's something you practice along with other emergency drills. Spin recovery would surely be a question of aerodynamics and the principles to recover the aircraft would be pretty much the same for every type.

As for not saving a crash - well it could have saved a life here very recently. And that was way outside the traffic pattern. Spins do happen outside the circuit - and people do get killed. If your aircraft allows you to practice recovery safely - it is foolish not to in my opinion.

Besides - spinning is heaps of fun!!

[tigerbatics]

I must say I agree with Robin Pilot. However the basic issue seems to be the nature of the flying people have actually done since gaining a licence. Those who have just toured around Europe, or wherever, or gone on to multi-engine flying,and assume their students will do the same, generally seem not to see the point of, in particular, spinning.

Frequent visitors to farm strips may take a different view.

The notion that an aeroplane is bound to crash if it spins at circuit height is often expressed but is simply not necessarily true with many, certainly older, types of aeroplane and possibly pilot. Obviously a multi turn power on flat spin is going to result in a pile of wreckage but a half or even one turn spin, properly dealt with, can often be recovered inside the available height. Anyway, no reason to give up and wait to crash because the instructor said it could not be recovered so was not worth learning.

I really do not like the idea of a pilot learning an 'incipient' anything without experiencing and fully understanding to what it is incipient.

[Troy McClure]

I always found slow flight (or at least slower than normal - say 60-70 knots) useful for students in quite early stages who were struggling with straight and level. Taking it from them, accelerating back to 90 knots and handing control back to them made them wonder what they ever found hard about S+L at normal airspeeds in the first place.

As for exercise 10A, I always demonstrated a full stall at the beginning of the exercise, otherwise the student was so frightened of stalling that they'd always lose altitude. The added advantage was that when I said we would do 10B next, there were no real concerns. I've come across some students (not my own) that had sleepless nights before doing 10B, when really stalling is no big deal (at altitude at least...).