spin, stall & first solo scary?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking of being sick, I was profoundly sick the first few times before I went solo. Wasn't fun but your body gets used to it. Coming up to 20 years and a few thousand hours under the belt and nothing since. Well apart from being sick in the back of a DC-3 on a severe turb day after a full night on the cans capped off by a dodgy kebab!
I think Chuck Yeager mentioned he was crook the first few times as well.
I think Chuck Yeager mentioned he was crook the first few times as well.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: downunder
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speedbird 9, I know we won't be doing spin training during PPL but what about CPL, no spin training during that too?
Critical Reynolds No, ill make sure i don't have any kebabs before i go up if i do get sick ill just have to get used too it and let time do its job.
Cya
Critical Reynolds No, ill make sure i don't have any kebabs before i go up if i do get sick ill just have to get used too it and let time do its job.
Cya
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Zealand
Age: 40
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SPL -101, good luck with your training, you will enjoy the ride. Don't worry about motion sickness, you will get over it. I did within the first few hours. Always come prepared for your lessons, research the questions you have, put in the effort and you will be rewarded well for it.
Your first solo flight will be your most memorable flight. I can still remember each and every detail of mine even though I did mine 9 years ago. I did a go-around just so I could do another circuit.
Stalls are nothing to be scared of. The main thing is to get a feel for the aircraft and know when she is approaching the stall, so you don't let it get that far in the first place.
Spinning is a must. It is good fun, but the idea behind it is to make you a safer and more proficient pilot in handling of the aircraft. And remember, it is not a developed spin, unless you have done two full turns. I have seen instructors teach their students 'spinning' by showing a wing drop and recovering it
Some days, you will do well, some days you will just feel like jumping out or killing your instructor, all part of the learning experience. When you will get your licence it will all be worth it.
Your first solo flight will be your most memorable flight. I can still remember each and every detail of mine even though I did mine 9 years ago. I did a go-around just so I could do another circuit.
Stalls are nothing to be scared of. The main thing is to get a feel for the aircraft and know when she is approaching the stall, so you don't let it get that far in the first place.
Spinning is a must. It is good fun, but the idea behind it is to make you a safer and more proficient pilot in handling of the aircraft. And remember, it is not a developed spin, unless you have done two full turns. I have seen instructors teach their students 'spinning' by showing a wing drop and recovering it
Some days, you will do well, some days you will just feel like jumping out or killing your instructor, all part of the learning experience. When you will get your licence it will all be worth it.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centaurus, nothing wrong with inverted spins if your in the right aircraft and have the requisite training. Course mate Peter Clark (RIP - big C) ejected from a Macchi at Jervis Bay with his instructor, which I presume is one of the inverted spin accidents you refer to. Our ab initio training on the T-34 included inverted spins, usually only a demonstration if I recall, but a instructor with the right temperament would give you a go.
Not too sure about that Sunny, not too many aircraft about these days that are spinnable in any event. The only spinning accident I recall from an intentional spin was a RNSW Aero Club Chipmunk where a two bob piece jammed the stick when recovery was attempted. Spinning was part of the PPL course in the Tiger Moth, Chipmunk, Victa days. Some Tigers and Chipmunks were fitted with anti spin strakes on the horizontal stab to address some perceived spinning issues. Never flew any with strakes fitted, but the standard Chippy and Tiger had no problem providing you did it (recovery) by the book. CASAs predecessor did ban Chippy spins for a very brief period, may have been till they sorted the RNSW accident - too long ago to state the reason with certainty. People could get into trouble by not waiting long enough for the recovery action to begin having effect, and then start trying something else, which was guaranteed to fail. The Tigers spin was a leisurely affair as I remember from these 44 years distant, where as the Chippy generated more excitement, not so leisurely and the canopy banging (noise) around on its runners. But still no big deal - well not until Clem Atkins RVAC tried teaching me recovery from spins on basic instruments in the Chippy.
SPL-101, go ahead and have fun.
It is not part because too many people got killed practising
SPL-101, go ahead and have fun.
Happened to have dinner recently with an ex-instructor who used to demo inverted spins in the Macchi - wish this thread had been a bit further advanced a few days ago.
Chipmunk spin characteristics attracted enough interest in the '50s for the Department to spin test each and every example on the register - report stated "complete confidence in the spinning recovery characteristics of the Chipmunk and fully endorses the technique prescribed by the manufacturer."
I note my opinion that it would not meet the later FAR 23 spin and recovery requirement.
As for Sunfish's comment
... an aircraft certified in the aerobatic category will not get into an unrecoverable spin even if it is mishandled. No guarantees on Experimental or Limited aircraft approved for aerobatics. There is one aircraft type approved for aerobatics here but intentional spinning is prohibited as it quickly enters an unrecoverable spin.
And Sunfish's other comment
... it is optional in the PPL syllabus and I'd say that, at Moorabbin, there are more PPL students who do spinning as part of their PPL than those who do not.
Chipmunk spin characteristics attracted enough interest in the '50s for the Department to spin test each and every example on the register - report stated "complete confidence in the spinning recovery characteristics of the Chipmunk and fully endorses the technique prescribed by the manufacturer."
I note my opinion that it would not meet the later FAR 23 spin and recovery requirement.
As for Sunfish's comment
It is possible for aircraft, even aerobatic aircraft, to get into unrecoverable spins if they are mishandled or
And Sunfish's other comment
Spin recovery is not part of the PPL syllabus
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aerobatics should be a part of the PPL syllabus (but never will be!) And it's not just for fun. It gives you the confidence that you can recover the aircraft from any attitude. They also give you the confidence to manouvre the aircraft in a smooth positive way.
A mate of mine did his PPL at a Bankstown school with aerobatics as part of 'their' syllabus. The difference between his and my flying skills with around the same hours were stark
Find the money somehow to do aerobatics as soon as you can
Good Luck
A mate of mine did his PPL at a Bankstown school with aerobatics as part of 'their' syllabus. The difference between his and my flying skills with around the same hours were stark
Find the money somehow to do aerobatics as soon as you can
Good Luck
It came to a head when I did my Wing Drop Stalls lesson
I know of one experienced instructor who for instance teaches the "wing drop stall" by pulling back on the stick until the aircraft is pointing skywards by 45 degrees or more than whacking on hard rudder to force a wing drop. The aircraft which is a relatively new design of five years old will normally never drop a wing and in fact the thing just flutters downwards wings level with full back stick.
It was designed to be safe to the most inexperienced pilot. So what's the point is making the aircraft drop a wing artificially by violent manoeuvres so outlandish that no sane student would ever find himself in that situation..
Now about this "wing drop stall"....
I bow to your experience Djpl, sorry I didn't get the chance to catch up at Avalon, once that gentleman started talking I couldn't get away......
From what I heard at YMMB someone managed to get an alpha 160 "stuck" in a spin and had to get it out by unconventional means (rocking?). It always came out with a boot full of rudder whenever I tried it though.
From what I heard at YMMB someone managed to get an alpha 160 "stuck" in a spin and had to get it out by unconventional means (rocking?). It always came out with a boot full of rudder whenever I tried it though.
Yep, one too often hears about people being stuck in a spin. The last one I spoke to did not use the correct recovery technique or in other words did something contrary to the flight manual and the placard in front of his nose. He is spinning quite happily now.
See you at the next event, Sunfish.
See you at the next event, Sunfish.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centaurus,
A Cessna 150/152 does very gentle stalls, except if put into a gentle right hand turn with partial power.
In this state it will quickly turn left at the stall [dropping left wing if you like!]
I used to show all my students this once they were comfortable with more normal stalls.
Many aircraft which are normally benign have one combination which is interesting.
It is a pity so many Pilots make it through their training without even seeing a spin.
A Cessna 150/152 does very gentle stalls, except if put into a gentle right hand turn with partial power.
In this state it will quickly turn left at the stall [dropping left wing if you like!]
I used to show all my students this once they were comfortable with more normal stalls.
Many aircraft which are normally benign have one combination which is interesting.
It is a pity so many Pilots make it through their training without even seeing a spin.
A Cessna 150/152 does very gentle stalls, except if put into a gentle right hand turn with partial power.
The C150 that I learnt to fly in (VH-DTE - its still around!) some 37 years ago would drop a wing big time if stalled with 20o flap and 1800 rpm. I still remember my intro to stalls - I couldn't really understand what all the fuss was about until I got to that one. I gave a very good crow call (FAAAAAAAARK!) as it fell out of the sky.
Its been a few years since I instructed in the Traumahawk but I seem to recall that it would also occassionally not play nicely.
The FTDK will do the same thing if provoked, but gives much more warning than I recall from the C150.
I think the BE35 is a very docile aeroplane, and you would have to have your brain in neutral to inadvertantly stall it, but someone must have decided that it wasn't docile enough cause later model BE36s have ugly looking wedge things attached to the outter leading edge of the wing to make them even more docile. Always seemed to me to be a very lazy way to solve a non-existant problem - and ruined the look of a beautiful aeroplane.
Dr
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, I forgot the flap, they drop the left wing under power so I used to demo from a right turn. Of course the last of my 1000hrs+ instructing in two seat Cessnas was 25 years ago - I presume they still fly like that!
"flow strips" on Traumahawks killed it's spinning as well! They were scary though when you turned around and looked at the tail!
Just look at the Beech 1900 to see a poorly designed airframe.
"flow strips" on Traumahawks killed it's spinning as well! They were scary though when you turned around and looked at the tail!
Just look at the Beech 1900 to see a poorly designed airframe.
Moderator
Just look at the Beech 1900 to see a poorly designed airframe
.. like many aircraft, the 1900 has some flight test fixes evident here and there.
However, what specific and objective deficiencies can you cite to justify the comment that it is "a poorly designed airframe" ?
.. like many aircraft, the 1900 has some flight test fixes evident here and there.
However, what specific and objective deficiencies can you cite to justify the comment that it is "a poorly designed airframe" ?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NZ
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reverseflight,
I like your style. Get yourself in a Pitts, and a decent instructor, and go check out inverted spinning, really good fun.
If aerobatics was outlawed tomorrow, I would damn near walk away from aviation, such is my passion for aerobatic flight, some would call it obsession... Anyone who is knew, or not to this game, aerobatic training is a must. It will improve your situational awareness and ability like you couldn't possibly believe. I'd compare it to doing a full drift course at a race circuit, compared to working the indicators, pressing a pedal or two during a normal driving test.....
Tankengine, it is wrong, purely and simple. Spinning should be a requirement, not an option, for the PPL. It used to be, when trainees flew unstable taildragger biplanes. A Tiger will not fly straight without exactly the right inputs, I learn something new with them every time I go up. Now we have simple, boring, predictable, stable, easy, simple, did I say boring trainers that simply don't allow students to develop feel for the machine in those early days of training.
The problem is, the general perception is that taildraggers are differcult, that is how they are portrayed at many institutions, and so students get put off them.
a year ago or so, I was trying to explain adverse yaw to a student, in a cherokee...and it was really differcult to get them to see what the nose does...but I remember when I had a go in an Auster, how pronounced it was, I reckon everyone should do their medium turns lesson in an Auster. Gorgeous aeroplane.
I like your style. Get yourself in a Pitts, and a decent instructor, and go check out inverted spinning, really good fun.
If aerobatics was outlawed tomorrow, I would damn near walk away from aviation, such is my passion for aerobatic flight, some would call it obsession... Anyone who is knew, or not to this game, aerobatic training is a must. It will improve your situational awareness and ability like you couldn't possibly believe. I'd compare it to doing a full drift course at a race circuit, compared to working the indicators, pressing a pedal or two during a normal driving test.....
Tankengine, it is wrong, purely and simple. Spinning should be a requirement, not an option, for the PPL. It used to be, when trainees flew unstable taildragger biplanes. A Tiger will not fly straight without exactly the right inputs, I learn something new with them every time I go up. Now we have simple, boring, predictable, stable, easy, simple, did I say boring trainers that simply don't allow students to develop feel for the machine in those early days of training.
The problem is, the general perception is that taildraggers are differcult, that is how they are portrayed at many institutions, and so students get put off them.
a year ago or so, I was trying to explain adverse yaw to a student, in a cherokee...and it was really differcult to get them to see what the nose does...but I remember when I had a go in an Auster, how pronounced it was, I reckon everyone should do their medium turns lesson in an Auster. Gorgeous aeroplane.
Auster. Gorgeous aeroplane. 
Wouldn't give you two cents for any of them.
Dr
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Huge thread drift but simply look at the 1900!
To need that amount of fiddling to certify indicates poor design.The Kingair from which it grew did not need so many fins and strakes.
To need that amount of fiddling to certify indicates poor design.The Kingair from which it grew did not need so many fins and strakes.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NZ
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
djpil,
the Chippy is an intriguing machine to spin that's for sure... Looking through the book, all this reference to forward, if not full forward stick to initiate recovery didn't conform to all the others I have spun....but it's try, full opp rudder will not get a Chippy out...This one had the flow strips down the fuse to the leading edge of the horizontal stabiliser. No wonder so many crashed, pilots couldn't get their heads around it.
I practiced them in this machine from 7500ft as I wanted to look at use of power and aileron etc. Very, very interesting, couldn't be any more different!
the Chippy is an intriguing machine to spin that's for sure... Looking through the book, all this reference to forward, if not full forward stick to initiate recovery didn't conform to all the others I have spun....but it's try, full opp rudder will not get a Chippy out...This one had the flow strips down the fuse to the leading edge of the horizontal stabiliser. No wonder so many crashed, pilots couldn't get their heads around it.
I practiced them in this machine from 7500ft as I wanted to look at use of power and aileron etc. Very, very interesting, couldn't be any more different!