Spin training in most school is rubbish
Thread Starter
Spin training in most school is rubbish
I think that in most PPL schools Spinning is glossed over to a huge degree. At best all you get is some vague nonsene about "not using rudder in the stall".
Most PPL instructors will never send the aircraft "into" a departure recovering a controls neutral.
The JAA PPL clearly calls for an element of spin avoidance. This is generally not being met.
Discuss.
WWW
Most PPL instructors will never send the aircraft "into" a departure recovering a controls neutral.
The JAA PPL clearly calls for an element of spin avoidance. This is generally not being met.
Discuss.
WWW
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No stall, no spin. Therfore spin avoidance. (even in JAA BLX lingo)
However if you get caught in spin accidentaly, and don't notice the stall (Warner excepted) then................................
However if you get caught in spin accidentaly, and don't notice the stall (Warner excepted) then................................
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London UK
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What you have here is a vicious circle (no pun intended):
Folks learn to fly and are scared stiff of stalling by bar stories and badly demonstrated stall lessons. Spinning is then the subject of even more scary stories and is therefore either not covered or poorly taught including horribly alarming flick entry spins.
These folks become instructors and perpetuate the myths and apprehensions.
In summary, it is partially caused by poor instrucional technique and partially by poor spinning qualities of training aircraft which require a rather uncomfortable flick entry to actually enter a spin.
Really and truely, however, a good lengthy set of stalling sessions (preferrably with the stall warning CB pulled if possible) will do much to improve student confidence and knowledge of stalling.
Students are made victims of the 'recover at the first symptom' approach to stalling. First we should teach all about stalling, then we should teach minimum height loss etc.
Folks learn to fly and are scared stiff of stalling by bar stories and badly demonstrated stall lessons. Spinning is then the subject of even more scary stories and is therefore either not covered or poorly taught including horribly alarming flick entry spins.
These folks become instructors and perpetuate the myths and apprehensions.
In summary, it is partially caused by poor instrucional technique and partially by poor spinning qualities of training aircraft which require a rather uncomfortable flick entry to actually enter a spin.
Really and truely, however, a good lengthy set of stalling sessions (preferrably with the stall warning CB pulled if possible) will do much to improve student confidence and knowledge of stalling.
Students are made victims of the 'recover at the first symptom' approach to stalling. First we should teach all about stalling, then we should teach minimum height loss etc.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh dear!
If u stall, u might spin, witness the classic 300 Ft stall, spin scenario. Of course, u ought to learn to recover from, but if u have to, you ought not be there in the first place. Still, we've all messed up. So perhaps WWW is right.
If u stall, u might spin, witness the classic 300 Ft stall, spin scenario. Of course, u ought to learn to recover from, but if u have to, you ought not be there in the first place. Still, we've all messed up. So perhaps WWW is right.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A question often asked at the interview for application to teach the FI rating:-
"Should fully developed spin recovery be a mandatory element of the PPL syllabus (and give your reasons)"?
I have my own opinion, but would be interested in reading yours!
[ 28 August 2001: Message edited by: TheSilverFox ]
"Should fully developed spin recovery be a mandatory element of the PPL syllabus (and give your reasons)"?
I have my own opinion, but would be interested in reading yours!
[ 28 August 2001: Message edited by: TheSilverFox ]
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because, no matter what, the ability of the human being to get himself into a bad situation is (or ought to be, legendary). Take the automobile, if Jo Bloggs were taught to control a car at high (Motorway) speed, or in an emergency braking (once every 4.5 months on average). The Jo bloggs would be less of an accident statistic. Flying is in short dangerous. We MUST take every oportunity to cover EVERY eventuality that may occur in the air. It's no good saying that if you don't this, X will happen, here's how to deal with X. When if you DON'T do this,then Y will happen, Y is very bad, soooooo bad in fact we daren't teach yo how to deal with it' because it's tooo dangerous.
Good enough???
Good enough???
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silver fox, WWW
I defer to your greater knowlege. However I do feel that in the great AOPA, JAA and other Verbose bods discussion of the syllabus, certain short cuts were made to make the whoile thing 'affordable'. Now if affordable means dangerous, then I'm a monkey. As the great man (My PPL examiner) said, this is a licence to LEARN to fly, not a licence to FLY.
I defer to your greater knowlege. However I do feel that in the great AOPA, JAA and other Verbose bods discussion of the syllabus, certain short cuts were made to make the whoile thing 'affordable'. Now if affordable means dangerous, then I'm a monkey. As the great man (My PPL examiner) said, this is a licence to LEARN to fly, not a licence to FLY.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trefdraeth,
Youve done your bit!
Time for somebody else to make a contribution(perhaps WWW).
Having said that, it is almost 01:00, perhaps everyone has gone to bed. Thats where I'm off to now. I've got to do somebodys skill test first thing in the morning and I dont want to be a grumpy old bu**er due to lack of sleep!
See you in gourmet restaurant perhaps!!
Youve done your bit!
Time for somebody else to make a contribution(perhaps WWW).
Having said that, it is almost 01:00, perhaps everyone has gone to bed. Thats where I'm off to now. I've got to do somebodys skill test first thing in the morning and I dont want to be a grumpy old bu**er due to lack of sleep!
See you in gourmet restaurant perhaps!!
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First thanks to WWW for setting this one running.
I try not to let eny of my students get to the PPL skill test without at least one session of recovery from fully developed spins but if they dont want to spin i cant make them as it is not a requirement of the PPL.
If you catch the student at soon after they start the PPL training then the chances are that they will not have had time to take in all the bar room spinning rubbish.
As to not using rudder when stalling what rubbish , Yaw + stall= spin so to not keep the ball in the center with your feet is inviting a spin when during stall recovery when yaw is introduced in the form of power applied befor the stall has been broken (yes i have had a student do it to me !)
Taking spinning out of the PPL training has left us with instructors who dont spin very often and dont feel comfortable with spinning as a result dont want to teach it.
The removal of spinning from the PPL in my opinion has left us with a growing number of pilots who regard eny more that 60 degrees of bank as aerobatics and whos flying skills outside of a very small flight envolope are poor this leads on to the discusion in another pprune forum about the lack of flying skills of the modern airline pilot when faced with an emergency but i sujest that we do not open that can of worms here.
I try not to let eny of my students get to the PPL skill test without at least one session of recovery from fully developed spins but if they dont want to spin i cant make them as it is not a requirement of the PPL.
If you catch the student at soon after they start the PPL training then the chances are that they will not have had time to take in all the bar room spinning rubbish.
As to not using rudder when stalling what rubbish , Yaw + stall= spin so to not keep the ball in the center with your feet is inviting a spin when during stall recovery when yaw is introduced in the form of power applied befor the stall has been broken (yes i have had a student do it to me !)
Taking spinning out of the PPL training has left us with instructors who dont spin very often and dont feel comfortable with spinning as a result dont want to teach it.
The removal of spinning from the PPL in my opinion has left us with a growing number of pilots who regard eny more that 60 degrees of bank as aerobatics and whos flying skills outside of a very small flight envolope are poor this leads on to the discusion in another pprune forum about the lack of flying skills of the modern airline pilot when faced with an emergency but i sujest that we do not open that can of worms here.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The first 25 hrs of my PPL training was in Canada, where (ISTR) 3 hrs of full stall / spin training is mandatory pre-first solo. I approached my first spin (in a C172, which requires a bit of effort to spin) with some trepidation, but after a few of them, quite enjoyed them (but I had been in ATC doing back seat Chippy / Bulldog aeros for 20 yrs). After a while, I was recovering on specific headings after a specified number of turns - good way of taking your mind off the discomfort of the spin!
This training has possibly saved my life once; when back in UK, most of my PPL training was in PA28 / C152. The last 2 hrs of my PPL training was just to build solo time (I'd done everything else) and I was sent up just to make up the 10 hrs. I decided to practice stalls in various configs as I'd not done them in a C152. Luckily, I was at 5000 ft - the last stall I tried was cruise power and the left wing dropped like a stone straight into fully developed spin. I just reccovered the way I had with all other spins before (replaying instructors words in my head to close throttle, wait, opposite rudder, wait, etc). The a/c may have self-recovered, but at least I was able to remain calm and think logically.
Bring back spin training, I say; there may, however, be PPL candidates who are not comfortable with spinning - possibly make these candidates restricted to NPPL only or make it mandatory pre-IMC / Night training.
This training has possibly saved my life once; when back in UK, most of my PPL training was in PA28 / C152. The last 2 hrs of my PPL training was just to build solo time (I'd done everything else) and I was sent up just to make up the 10 hrs. I decided to practice stalls in various configs as I'd not done them in a C152. Luckily, I was at 5000 ft - the last stall I tried was cruise power and the left wing dropped like a stone straight into fully developed spin. I just reccovered the way I had with all other spins before (replaying instructors words in my head to close throttle, wait, opposite rudder, wait, etc). The a/c may have self-recovered, but at least I was able to remain calm and think logically.
Bring back spin training, I say; there may, however, be PPL candidates who are not comfortable with spinning - possibly make these candidates restricted to NPPL only or make it mandatory pre-IMC / Night training.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Diego - now Paris
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the US, spin training used to be part of the PPL syllabus, but there were more accidents during the training than in real life --- so a change in philosophy to "stall avoidance" was controversially implemented.
You may find it interesting that in my training as a military fighter pilot, I only had one flight of spin training. (Jet engines don't like the prolonged lack of air flow that comes from spins -- and some jets easily enter flat spins which are generally bad news.) We probably did one spin flight in primary training (prop aircraft) but I think most of the training focussed on slow flight and acro training rather than spins.
In the fleet as a fighter pilot, we had strict rules about no slow speed (<300 kts) "dog fights" below 10,000 feet, and we briefed spin recovery procedures at every ACM (dog fighting) brief. I never did spin a fighter, but I did have several high speed departures (a "wooferdill" at 450 kts from pulling too many g's - very high AOA at high speed). The aircraft recovers by itself almost instantly after swapping ends once or twice).
As for GA, I guess I side with the school that says focus on stall avoidance/stall recovery rather than spins. Spin training should only be taken on as a fun acro-related activity --- and not a formal part of basic training. Again, the trainng accident rate made the cure worse than the disease. My two cents anyway ....
You may find it interesting that in my training as a military fighter pilot, I only had one flight of spin training. (Jet engines don't like the prolonged lack of air flow that comes from spins -- and some jets easily enter flat spins which are generally bad news.) We probably did one spin flight in primary training (prop aircraft) but I think most of the training focussed on slow flight and acro training rather than spins.
In the fleet as a fighter pilot, we had strict rules about no slow speed (<300 kts) "dog fights" below 10,000 feet, and we briefed spin recovery procedures at every ACM (dog fighting) brief. I never did spin a fighter, but I did have several high speed departures (a "wooferdill" at 450 kts from pulling too many g's - very high AOA at high speed). The aircraft recovers by itself almost instantly after swapping ends once or twice).
As for GA, I guess I side with the school that says focus on stall avoidance/stall recovery rather than spins. Spin training should only be taken on as a fun acro-related activity --- and not a formal part of basic training. Again, the trainng accident rate made the cure worse than the disease. My two cents anyway ....
Thread Starter
Well I was obviously playing late night devils advocate with this thread 
I base my opinion on what I have seen and heard over the years in a variety of flying school and clubs around the country.
I have found on more than one occassion that a student believed that he should be very careful with the rudder during stalling as their instructor had told them thats how they enter a spin. Such crass carry over from pro-spin entry into a PPL holders thinking is embarassing. The concept of adverse yaw from the ailerons is quite frequently 'forgotten' somewhere. Pretty fundamental stuff.
As for the syllabus. As I understand it in the good old days when spinnning was still in you had the following situation (illustrative numbers only):
11 people killed in spin accidents per year, 8 during some form of training.
Spinning removed from general syllabus...
5 people a year killed in spin accidents.
What has been achieved is fewer spin related accidents BUT an increase in spin accidents during which the pilot may have had no effective training in how to recover.
Its very much a baby and bathwater conundrum.
I admit I've not dug into the stats to check this theory but it has been received wisdom from several different sources over the years.
My view is that its OK to leave spinning out of the syllabus AS LONG AS the spin entry recognition and recovery is taught effectively and the FULL implications of adverse yaw/use of rudder are covered in ever lasting detail in the classroom.
By preference for myself I would like spinning to become mandatory because I enjoy the discipline the exercise imposes.
I also think its a good idea that you *teach* some of the manouveres that PPL's will generally try within their 1st 100hrs with passengers on board, e.g. chandelles, wing overs.
Cheers,
WWW
I base my opinion on what I have seen and heard over the years in a variety of flying school and clubs around the country.
I have found on more than one occassion that a student believed that he should be very careful with the rudder during stalling as their instructor had told them thats how they enter a spin. Such crass carry over from pro-spin entry into a PPL holders thinking is embarassing. The concept of adverse yaw from the ailerons is quite frequently 'forgotten' somewhere. Pretty fundamental stuff.
As for the syllabus. As I understand it in the good old days when spinnning was still in you had the following situation (illustrative numbers only):
11 people killed in spin accidents per year, 8 during some form of training.
Spinning removed from general syllabus...
5 people a year killed in spin accidents.
What has been achieved is fewer spin related accidents BUT an increase in spin accidents during which the pilot may have had no effective training in how to recover.
Its very much a baby and bathwater conundrum.
I admit I've not dug into the stats to check this theory but it has been received wisdom from several different sources over the years.
My view is that its OK to leave spinning out of the syllabus AS LONG AS the spin entry recognition and recovery is taught effectively and the FULL implications of adverse yaw/use of rudder are covered in ever lasting detail in the classroom.
By preference for myself I would like spinning to become mandatory because I enjoy the discipline the exercise imposes.
I also think its a good idea that you *teach* some of the manouveres that PPL's will generally try within their 1st 100hrs with passengers on board, e.g. chandelles, wing overs.
Cheers,
WWW
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Chichester, UK
Posts: 871
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From a pre-solo PPL's point of view, I'm going to go spinning at some point, but not yet. Already done stalls, stalls+wing drop etc. (but in a Warrior, so WWW will say that doesn't count ), but there's other stuff I'd rather be doing right now. However I feel it's something I should experience, just in case. My plan is to take a half dozen lessons post solo in a Tomahawk to brush up on any bad habits that the Warrior is giving me, and finish that off with stalls and spins.
Main worry about spinning is that I'll hold on to my lunch...
), but there's other stuff I'd rather be doing right now. However I feel it's something I should experience, just in case. My plan is to take a half dozen lessons post solo in a Tomahawk to brush up on any bad habits that the Warrior is giving me, and finish that off with stalls and spins. Main worry about spinning is that I'll hold on to my lunch...
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course spinning should be included in PPL training! 
Oh, you want a reason? Well, it's fun! What more reason do you need? I was also fortunate enough to have an instructor who agreed with me. You could often see a little sparkle in my instructors eyes whenever you talked about flying. When I mentioned that I wanted spin-training, though, his eyes lit up.
I know you can't spin Warriors, but I didn't realise you could spin Cherokees - and the club had two of them at the time. I told my instructor I was going to go somewhere else to get some spin training. He practically begged me not to, that he'd take me spinning in a Cherokee.
We'd had a long period of poor weather, with ceiling around 1500' every weekend. That was fine by me, because I was doing circuit training at the time, and the ceiling was more than high enough to fly circuits. Then, one weekend, the weather was absolutely perfect, but I'd forgotten all about spinning. I turned up at the airfield, and noticed that I'd been put into a different aircraft to the one I'd booked the previous week. Hmm - strange. Then my instructor walked in, with a huge grin on his face - "FFF, d'you fancy spinning today?" Of course I do! Now it made sense - the aircraft they'd put me in was a Cherokee!
Instructor demonstrated the first spin - it was pretty scary. Then he had me do one. I had a vague idea what to expect now, but bottled it and didn't pull the yoke back far enough. It did something almost like a spin, but not quite. The next one was fine, except that I pulled out of it before it really got started. Then the instructor had me hold it in the spin for a couple of turns (actually counted turns, and was amazed that what seemed like about 10 or 12 was only two!) before recovery. Now it started to become fun! By the end of the session, I was really enjoying myself, and wanted a bigger engine so that I could spend less time climbing and more time spinning!
I think that, despite reading all the theory, if I ever found myself in an inadvertent spin (very unlikely in PA28s, I know - those things barely stall!) without the training, I'd have frozen.
I've read the arguments about more accidents in spin training than real inadvertant spin accidents, but I'm not convinced. I'm ready to be corrected by someone with some real acro experience, but as far as I can see, if you're in a properly-loaded aircraft which is cleared for spinning, the only way you can have an accident is by not having enough height at the start of the excercise. And any instructor who spins without enough height to recover from the student's botched recovery (or tries to spin an improperly loaded aircraft, or tries to spin something which isn't designed to spin) should not be a pilot, let alone an instructor.
The only reason I can see for making spin training non-compulsary is that it was scaring prospective pilots off. Well, sorry, but that doesn't wash with me. Ok, so I really enjoyed spinning, but I can see that other people don't. But scary things can happen in an aircraft. Maybe not even your fault. If you can't keep your cool with an instructor next to you doing spin recoveries, how are you going to keep your cool with no instructor, no training, and probably less height than you'd like, when it really matters? You might not enjoy, but if you can't handle it, maybe you should stick to a bicycle, for your own safety?
Just my 2p from a low-time PPL.
FFF
----------
Oh, you want a reason? Well, it's fun! What more reason do you need? I was also fortunate enough to have an instructor who agreed with me. You could often see a little sparkle in my instructors eyes whenever you talked about flying. When I mentioned that I wanted spin-training, though, his eyes lit up.
I know you can't spin Warriors, but I didn't realise you could spin Cherokees - and the club had two of them at the time. I told my instructor I was going to go somewhere else to get some spin training. He practically begged me not to, that he'd take me spinning in a Cherokee.
We'd had a long period of poor weather, with ceiling around 1500' every weekend. That was fine by me, because I was doing circuit training at the time, and the ceiling was more than high enough to fly circuits. Then, one weekend, the weather was absolutely perfect, but I'd forgotten all about spinning. I turned up at the airfield, and noticed that I'd been put into a different aircraft to the one I'd booked the previous week. Hmm - strange. Then my instructor walked in, with a huge grin on his face - "FFF, d'you fancy spinning today?" Of course I do! Now it made sense - the aircraft they'd put me in was a Cherokee!
Instructor demonstrated the first spin - it was pretty scary. Then he had me do one. I had a vague idea what to expect now, but bottled it and didn't pull the yoke back far enough. It did something almost like a spin, but not quite. The next one was fine, except that I pulled out of it before it really got started. Then the instructor had me hold it in the spin for a couple of turns (actually counted turns, and was amazed that what seemed like about 10 or 12 was only two!) before recovery. Now it started to become fun! By the end of the session, I was really enjoying myself, and wanted a bigger engine so that I could spend less time climbing and more time spinning!
I think that, despite reading all the theory, if I ever found myself in an inadvertent spin (very unlikely in PA28s, I know - those things barely stall!) without the training, I'd have frozen.
I've read the arguments about more accidents in spin training than real inadvertant spin accidents, but I'm not convinced. I'm ready to be corrected by someone with some real acro experience, but as far as I can see, if you're in a properly-loaded aircraft which is cleared for spinning, the only way you can have an accident is by not having enough height at the start of the excercise. And any instructor who spins without enough height to recover from the student's botched recovery (or tries to spin an improperly loaded aircraft, or tries to spin something which isn't designed to spin) should not be a pilot, let alone an instructor.
The only reason I can see for making spin training non-compulsary is that it was scaring prospective pilots off. Well, sorry, but that doesn't wash with me. Ok, so I really enjoyed spinning, but I can see that other people don't. But scary things can happen in an aircraft. Maybe not even your fault. If you can't keep your cool with an instructor next to you doing spin recoveries, how are you going to keep your cool with no instructor, no training, and probably less height than you'd like, when it really matters? You might not enjoy, but if you can't handle it, maybe you should stick to a bicycle, for your own safety?
Just my 2p from a low-time PPL.
FFF
----------
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Expat Kiwi living in London
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spin training is also not mandatory in New Zealand, although stalling a Tomahawk with power on and flaps out (as I recall) can produce a fairly sporting wing drop...the worst of which I encountered in my GFT-equivalent with the CFI.
I would have thought that anyone that has trained in Tomahawk may have a greater appreciation (than a student on say a 152) of the correct spin recovery inputs even if he / she has not spun, since they are likely to have encountered similarly pronounced wing drops in certain configurations.
But that is certainly no substitute for proper spin training. In my case, I then managed to get through several years of GA flying without even having spun. Predictably perhaps, this lead to the spin becoming a bit of a mental block.
So when I first spun in a Yak 52 6 years after gaining my PPL (with Russian instructor in tow I might add), it was pretty exciting. It did make me wonder why it was not part of the syllabus for the PPL. So for what it is worth, my vote is for spin training to be included as part of PPL training. But not just an hour - several hours. Why? Because a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.
Perhaps this will increase the number of hours that a PPL will take - not a politically correct suggestion in the current era where the NPPL is suggested as a qualification that will take fewer hours than a "normal" PPL.
However my view is that in any event, the best time to take further instruction is immediately after gaining your PPL. Perhaps an IMC rating, perhaps a few flights with a safety pilot eg a Cross Channel check out etc etc.
So really why not add a few hours of valuable training to the PPL and extend, rather than reduce, the syllabus. Surely the incremental cost is insignificant, if additional training does in fact reduce the number of deaths of injuries from accidents resulting from faiing to recover from a flight condition that the new PPL-holder has never experienced?
I would have thought that anyone that has trained in Tomahawk may have a greater appreciation (than a student on say a 152) of the correct spin recovery inputs even if he / she has not spun, since they are likely to have encountered similarly pronounced wing drops in certain configurations.
But that is certainly no substitute for proper spin training. In my case, I then managed to get through several years of GA flying without even having spun. Predictably perhaps, this lead to the spin becoming a bit of a mental block.
So when I first spun in a Yak 52 6 years after gaining my PPL (with Russian instructor in tow I might add), it was pretty exciting. It did make me wonder why it was not part of the syllabus for the PPL. So for what it is worth, my vote is for spin training to be included as part of PPL training. But not just an hour - several hours. Why? Because a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.
Perhaps this will increase the number of hours that a PPL will take - not a politically correct suggestion in the current era where the NPPL is suggested as a qualification that will take fewer hours than a "normal" PPL.
However my view is that in any event, the best time to take further instruction is immediately after gaining your PPL. Perhaps an IMC rating, perhaps a few flights with a safety pilot eg a Cross Channel check out etc etc.
So really why not add a few hours of valuable training to the PPL and extend, rather than reduce, the syllabus. Surely the incremental cost is insignificant, if additional training does in fact reduce the number of deaths of injuries from accidents resulting from faiing to recover from a flight condition that the new PPL-holder has never experienced?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I don't think it should be compulsory as there are some people who REALLY do not like these sort of manouvers, however it (AND aero's) SHOULD be strongly encouraged, especially foranyone who is intending ANY sort of career in aviation.
Spin trainig should be done in a suitable aircraft, teaching in C150's and most Cherokees tends to be rushed because the spin will often degrade into a spiral dive and so is not really good spin training, IMHO the best aircraft is the Chippie or the DH82a - also the Tomahawk spins well, but DON'T look back at the tail while you are doing so!
Spin trainig should be done in a suitable aircraft, teaching in C150's and most Cherokees tends to be rushed because the spin will often degrade into a spiral dive and so is not really good spin training, IMHO the best aircraft is the Chippie or the DH82a - also the Tomahawk spins well, but DON'T look back at the tail while you are doing so!