Flying Instructors who refuse to spin

[Croqueteer]

BPF Point taken, I was probably a bit flippant with my post, but if a 20flap stall in a climbing turn, which was what I was doing turns into a spin , that is not intentional spinning, although I admit I had a fair idea what was to happen. I was always careful not to exceed the flap limiting speed, and as I remember I would be running the flap up as soon as recovery began. However, the whole point of the post was to warn that Cessnas are not always pussy-cats, THEY CAN AND DO BITE!

[Capt Homesick]

I've spun a PA38- after I'd done the required spins for my BCPL (showing my age there), I did some more so I could look back at the tail. As far as I can tell, that particular horror story is a myth...
Croqueteer makes a very good point about the C152's ability to bite. I never spin with flaps down, but here is a good instructional exercise in the 152:
Set up the aircraft in approach configuration- 1500 RPM, 20 degrees flap. Set the aircraft in a turn using no more than 20 degress bank. Use just enough back pressure to maintain altitude.
What happens next varies with individual aircraft. With most, a turn in one direction leads to the aircraft stalling out of the turn, sometimes to wings level, sometimes to a banked attitude in the other direction. Turn in the other direction, carry out the same experiment, (keep the aircraft balanced, it makes surprisingly little difference), and the result will be a rapid flick into the turn, leaving the aircraft inverted.
Apologies if I'm teaching the other Cessna "vets" to suck eggs here, but if you haven't seen this, practice it with another instructor until you're happy with it, then add it to the later stalling lessons. With good briefing, it teaches the student to respect the low-speed environment. It's also tremendous fun to demonstrate!

[hugh flung_dung]

I don't understand the concern about deliberate spinning in an aircraft that's appropriately cleared - the aircraft has been cleared to spin and recover safely. It's a situation that a pilot can encounter and they should be shown it (and how to recover) during training - obviously the entry level should be sensible and parachutes should be worn if physically possible.
The "only teach avoidance" view really doesn't work because a pilot who had never experienced a spin would be very unlikely to recover if they ever encountered one - besides, you need to show the stude what they are avoiding.
If an instructor is not willing to spin they aren't master of the job and should receive more training.

[Michael Whitton]

I CANT BELEIVE YOU GUYS SPIN THE TOMAHAWK!!!!

you guys are crazy. Over here most of them have had spin approval removed for years and your not even aloud to conduct developed incipient spins due to a tail detachemtn problem

next time you take one of them up have a geez at the tail as it enters the drop.... .kinda moves around to much for my liking

[Mr. TCU]

If the tail of a Tomahawk has structural integrity problems in spins, then why would you even want to fly it? Granted you can do your best to avoid entering a spin, but what if one should inadvertantly occur? Wouldn't it be nice to know that the aircraft won't fall to pieces, leaving you able to perform the recovery?

Perhaps there are just aircraft out there that can't be spun or else they will fall apart. Am I right or do all aircraft have to demonstrate a recovery?

[big pistons forever]

All single engine aircraft certified in the normal catagory and not approved for spins must never the less demonstrate that a safe recovery can be made from a one turn spin. After one turn you are on your own. A good example is my own personal airplane , a Grumman American AA1B. It will recover after one turn I am told but numerous accidents have conclusively demonstrated if held in a spin past one turn, it will go into a unrecoverable flat spin mode. With respect to the PA38 Traumahawk , I flew the first one imported into Canada in 1978. It was a low serial number machine
with no mods. The spin characteristics were pretty frightning and shortly thereafter the wing was modified with stall strips which helped alot. I think the main propblem with this airplane was its very poor build quality. Most of the AD's address structural problems caused by trying to save money on the production line.

[Saxon]

Big Pistons Forever is absolutly right, in Canada spining has been dropped from the PPL course, but it remains a 'flight test item' for the CPL.

Personaly I enjoy spinning and think it is an essensial tool for building good hands and feet skills, as well as confidence.....but only if done safely.

Having said that, I have only practiced spinning in a C172 which is extreamly docile in this area compared with other machines. I once had the oppertunity to fly some 'areos' in an Extra 300, talk about spinning.........!!! Deffinately a case of 'don't try this at home kids'. No, I wasn't on my own; and yes, the back seat had an extreamy proficient and well experienced aerobatic pilot sat in it. I didn't think the world could wizz around that fast...what a ride !!!

[pilotbear]

Whilst I accept the part about the PA 38 tail flexing on recovery sometimes, the main problem with the Tomahawk is its tendency to Flat Spin if the C of G is not far enough forward.
If you do spin it, (and I personally think that spin recovery should be fully taught), then watch for the nose pitching up towards the horizon during the spin.
There are several fatal examples of this in the U.S. and there are not a lot of instructors out there who will spin one intentionally.
If it happens, you can (if you are lucky and have the height!!), loosen your shoulder straps and pull yourselves towards the panel to move the C of G forward. This might sound drastic but I know this from experience, I was a pupil not an instructor then. I also know this has happened to others.

The tomahawk that we know now is not the same A/C as was tested by the FAA. It has four less wing spars and the tail construction is different.

Other than that it is a nice aeroplane to learn to fly in as you have to fly it. Cessnas fly themselves.

[FridayNightPalma]

Many years ago at a flight instructors renewal (when I instructed) the subject of alternative spin recovery came up. I remember the examiner explian recovery could be achieved with ''in to spin aileron'', which would increase the stall of the upgoing wing with increased AOA and cause it to drop and visaversa the result being an end of autorotation.

This was so long ago I can't remember the type but seem to remember it worked during the airex.

Has anyone ever come across this technique or did I dream it?

[djpil]

I hate to make too many general comments on spinning. The use of inspin aileron is often antispin ie aids recovery. Not true of all types though.

Inspin aileron is part of the recommended procedure for spin recovery of the CT-4 for example. The spin recovery placard on some Pitts models includes the use of inspin aileron for recovery if required.

There's some more information here.
Spinning Notes

[bcpilot]

Spinning for the purpose of "saving lives" is ridiculous!! Consider:
a) A large percentage of spin accidents are caused by practicing spins

b) In normal flight operations, inadvertantly entering a spin is highly unlikely

c) Most inadvertant spins occur when an aircraft is low turning base to final on a forced approach, due to ground shyness (the tendency for a nervous pilot to underbank and attempt to turn using excess bottom rudder). This means they are probably trying to conserve altitude to get past an obstacle. An entry into a spin under these conditions will almost certainly result in an accident even if proper recovery actions are taken.

Therefore, practicing spins does not prevent stall/spin accidents.


Having said that, I'd like to say that I believe in teaching spins as a confidence builder as well as a coordination exercise. In fact, I believe a few hours of aerobatics is good for every private pilot, as they should know the capabilities of their machine. If a student learns to "be scared" of a spin, but they have never seen one, they will not be as confident with stick and rudder.

[slim_slag]

bcpilot is pretty much on the mark. A "few hours" is getting correct, the half a dozen spins you need to get in your logbook to instruct is pretty worthless. Quite often the second time the instructor spins is when he is signing off his first instructor student . So we have somebody who doesn't know how to spin teaching the maneuver to somebody who has never spinned. Recipe for disaster, treat spinning with respect, especially when you are an instructor with passengers.

[bcpilot]

slim_slag: That's not so in Canada. Personally, as soon as I was allowed in the practice area solo, i was spin-spin-spinning my ass off!! It's the most fun a private pilot can have in a non-aerobatic plane. Nothing makes your friends puke like three or four spins followed by a coupla zero g's and an uncoordinated steep turn.

Most young student pilots I know are the same. Once they find out they're allowed to go out and practice spins, that's all they do for a while. They're fun, and most students don't realize that they might be dangerous. They figure if they were that dangerous, the school wouldn't be teaching them at such an elementary level.

[oceanicclarence]

Traumahawk !

My flying instructor taught me spin recovery in a PA 38, and my god was it scary ! power off, control column gradually back left rudder and WHAM !! jeeeeeezus ! it went kinda inverted and just tore into a spin ! so very quick so very scary, if that happened to an unwitting PPL solo then im sorry i dont care what anyone says , they would be finished, end of story. i learnt a lot of respect for what a training aircraft can do after that, the the word here is RESPECT. i then got my instructor to show me how to recover, properly and from most attitudes and entries, this is such an important part of training, if an aircraft can spin then recovery should be taught, because all good pilots should have an escape plan if things go pear shaped !

keep it up guys, your job is undervalued.

[slim_slag]

Well bcpilot, it goes to show why 'crazy canuck' slips off the tongue so easily

Plenty of flying schools nowadays don't have a plane that is truly spin certified, or they are placarded against spinning. Flight Instructors are scared ****less about them. Low flying appears to be how the guys get their kicks round here. Not uncommon for planes to come back with bits of tree hanging off them.

[bcpilot]

That's funny about the low flying. I overheard a CPL student the other day saying what a thrill it is to spin over the city at night with a <1000 foot recovery. Not exacly my bag, but maybe I'm a stick in the mud.

[TRF4EVR]

Big Pistons and bear are quite correct regarding the reason for the spate of traumahawk crashes. The build quality was so low, and the wing so flexible (due to the missing ribs) that in some instances the wing would flex into a "not-exactly-NACA" shape during the spin and become unrecoverable (or this is the theory, anyhow).

I recall reading a few years ago a testimonial by a Piper production test pilot that essentially said "You never knew, depending on the airplane. One would be docile, the next treacherous."

They say that the stall strips prevented this by forcing a stall earlier. How this prevents the wing flexing problem is beyond me and I don't spin the beasts.

Oh. And the tail certainly does wag in a most alarming fashion if you stall it.

Having said all of that, its a lovely airplane for x-c work, or if you happen to be Large Sized. And in my humble opinion, teaches a bit more respect for the airplane than Brand C.

[shortstripper]

D129

It doesn't look like anyone has answered your question?

I'm not sure when spin training for PPL stopped in the UK but it was before I started my PPL in 1990. I think it was more to do with the fact that many schools had aircraft that were not cleared for spin training; this obviously made it difficult for them to operate without having something that could.

I started gliding in the mid 80's and everybody had to do spin training before solo (at my club anyway) I didn't know that had changed, but if it has it's probably for the same reason as above. I know some of the modern glass gliders are very difficult to spin and need ballast on the tail in order to do so. Gliders are very benign in the spin compared to powered aircraft. Rotation rates are slow and recovery almost instantanious. I remember watching the national coach of the time putting perspective CFI's through their paces at North Hill once. He was putting them into spins and having them recover not above 1000' ... there were a few ashen faces that day!

Talking of PA38 tails ... look at a gliders wings when pulling hard, or an airliners wing tips going up and down. It's things that don't flex when they should that you must worry about. Wood and fabric or tube and fabric aircraft don't "shudder" or "drum" like ally ones ... but they still flex. Also, although PA38's have changed, I think if they have four spars less than before then they must be left with no spars? ... now there's an interesting idea

SS

SS

[hugh flung_dung]

shortstripper: I agree there's a difference in attitude between gliding instruction and power instruction when it comes to spinning. During my time at splasham we used to regularly spin the more experienced studes in the circuit (and see how many loops, etc we could manage from the last winch launch) but wouldn't dream of carrying that into GA. The handling characteristics are very different, the operating regimes are different and the attitudes of the individuals are very different. Recently someone needed a spin/aeros check in a Bulldog so we put parachutes on and went to 8-9000ft, this allowed me to let them use nearly full out-spin aileron during the supposed recovery before advising them of the error of their ways. If we'd been lower I may have been a little more concerned about their actions

Aeroplanes are capable of spinning, spin entry and recovery should therefore be taught as part of the course; but it must be taught in a safe, realistic and structured way. Not by nervous AFI (sorry, FI(R)) pulling hard back with full rudder, causing a half flick roll entry, and then recovering after a turn or so. It should be taught from a sideslip ('surprising how fast that high wing can drop) or from an over-ruddered turn or from a slow gliding steep turn ... things which a stude could conceivably do.
Who in their right mind is daft enough to approach the stall, pull full aft stick and push full rudder?
Answer: a non-aero FI demonstrating a supposed "accidental" spin entry.

Spinning should be taught, instructors should be comfortable in any attitude (and beer should be free and ...).

HFD

[LocoDriver]

Hello from a New Zealand instructor. I am happy to spin a Cessna 152, great little beast, a 172 is harder to get in to a spin.
I wont spin a 150 horse 150 (150/150) , and NO WAY A PA38!

The 150/150 has a C of G change that makes it a little, shall we say, hard to recover, and I have had problems with recovery with a 152tailwheel conversion.

Instructors here must do a 1 hr spinning lesson b4 they get an
instructor rating, but not many get an endorsement to teach spinning. It is safe when do correctly(even fun) with a well maintained C152 Aerobat.