They are fascinating things, but undeniably very "different" to conventional aeroplanes - to the point that I gather pilots with significant time on conventional aeroplanes usually take longer to solo one that an ab-inition student. Everything is different - push right to roll left in flight, and push right to turn left on the nosewheel steering, plus a foot throttle.

Once learned however, my experience is that it's like riding a bicycle - in that I find going from a conventional aeroplane to a flexwing is much like going from a car to a bicycle - so different I don't get confused any more.

Worth a go if you ever fancy a bit of novelty and excitement in your life - just do it on a nice warm day :8

G

Of course. I should have said stick centrally forward, full power....

nick14, I agree with the point you are making but would prefer the phrase "move the control column centrally forward until the buffet stops (or, as I prefer, until the stall identification ceases)".

"Lowering the angle of attack" might be confused with "Lower the nose" and whilst it tells the student what to do, it doesn't tell him/her how to do it.

As I was the OP on this thread I thank all who have contributed to an interesting debate which is how we learn.

I tell my PPL students to "lower the nose".

Theory "Reduce the AOA" is for the class room.

Practical actions "Lower the nose" is for in the airplane instruction.

For PPL students - agree.

For more advanced or more adventurous pilots, I really prefer to say "reduce back pressure on the controls". This directly affects the angle of attack, gives tactile feedback (buffet stops) and will unstall the wing.
In a high speed stall or tight turn, this may not mean the same as "lower the nose".
Incipient spins usually arise from unbalanced turns rather than low airspeed alone.

Can I add another aspect to consider when defining an 'incipient spin'.

Let's first consider what defines a 'fully developed' spin. This is one in which the mean axis about which the aircraft is rotating is vertical. The aircraft will have pitch, roll and yaw rates but there will be an earth referenced axis about which the overall rotation occurs. Any consideration of the balance of inertial and aerodynamic moments relates to whether the spin is oscillatory or non-oscillatory. For example, if the moments are not balanced but the rotational axis is vertical then the aircraft will be in an oscillatory, fully developed spin.

Immediately before the control inputs that cause an aircraft to spin are made, it will have a flight path which inevitably is not vertically down as will be the case in a fully developed spin (you can flick-roll on a down vertical but airspeed will generally be too high to enter a spin). Therefore, there is another phase of the manoeuvre between entry and the fully developed spin, and this is what is generally considered in my world to be the incipient spin. This may last anywhere between about 1.5 and 4 turns from a level entry but could well be as high as 6 turns from a manoeuvre. It very type specific and also varies according to the aircraft's flightpath and power setting at entry.

In my opinion, what you do with the power in the recovery from an incipient spin needs to be type specific because the effects of propwash, torque and gyroscopic moments vary from type to type, and direction of spin along with being erect or inverted may require different optimal power settings. And let's not forget that jets spin also! However, for training simplicity and safety it is best if the recovery from the initial stage of an inadvertent spin is the same as that from an unusual attitude recovery and therefore some degree of compromise may be necessary to achieve this so long as recovery from a spin is not prejudiced.

I fly and spin one type that when centralising the controls during an incipient spin, as defined above, often does not result in recovery. This is the Harvard in a right, idle power spin. Any more than 1/2 turn and it requires at least 1/2opposite rudder as well as neutral or forward elevator to recover. I accept that we do not attempt this recovery power on, in deference to the age of the aircraft, and so I cannot say whether or not that would improve recovery characteristics.

Bizdottest
 

ICAO has an initiative to introduce LoC/upset recovery to all training courses from CPL onwards; EASA has a working group looking at that issue.
Personally I would teach scenario based LoC/upset from Ex 4 PPL (the spiral dive) and get away from the traditional concentration on academic stalling exercises which seem to based on the skill test requirement.
'Recognition and recovery' is the aim not pretty exercise sets.

The Working Group's main objective is to design a UPRT programme for CPL and type and class rating training, however this module is 95% avoidance and prevention, hence Upset Prevention and Recovery Training.

I'm not sure whether they will add in spinning at all.