No spin training in the US?

[Mark Morissette]

What's eveyrones opinion regarding the lack of spin traning for
students in the US? I see that there was a thread about this from an
instructor viewpoint a while back, but not necessarilly from the
student viewpoint.

Personally, there was only two lessons that I didn't look forward to -
Spin training, and spiral dives.

Spiral dives turned out to be nothing at all.. 15 minutes, 4 or 5
spirals, quick and safe recoveries, and that was over. Nothing to it,
I was worried about something which amounted to easy training.

Spins however, as comfortable of a student as I am, got me a little
excited. However, we went out, did them, and that was it.

Looking back on things, I'm *very* glad that they are still part of
the curiculum here in Canada. It's easy to "read" about something
in the POH and try to cram all that into your cranium should the
situation ever occur, but...

Can anyone here honestly say that everything they've ever read, versus
practiced in the air, equals the same training-wise?

For example, if you never had spin training, and suddenly found
yourself in a spin, would you be confident that everything you "read"
about them will get you out of it? Yes, you can read what's
necessary, but can you automatically recall all of that in the air,
when your first inintentional "lesson" on spins could possibly be at
1000AGL in the circuilt?

I've consistently found that lessons practiced quickly become second
nature, whereas things I've read take much more time to fully grasp
untill it comes into real-life practice...and there is no substitution
for the real thing - anyone who has spent time flying MS Flight
Simulator before flying the real thing can certainly attest to this.

Yes, the spins were not fun.. I wasn't one of the students who were
so paranoid of them that I was cancelling flights to avoid the
inevitable, and then ended up in the fetal position on the floor of
the plane during them - I just wasn't "excited" about them like
everything else. <grin>

Yep, there was a whole lot more "Ground" in the windscreen all of a
sudden then I ever want to see again. But I'm glad I did it.

During the actual training, my proficiency with initiating, and (more
importantly) recovering from the spins gained rapidly. By the 4th or
5th spin, I was able to recover consistently and quickly, without much
"thinking" about what to do, and more "automatically" just doing it.

More importantly, I was in the 100's of feel of alt lost, instead of
the 1000's in the first spins. If an unintentional spin ever
happened in the circuit, I'm much more likely to be able to recover
before hitting terra-firma now, then I would have been initially.

I can't honestly say that if spin training was not part of the
curriculum here still, that I wouldn't ask for it regardless..fun or
otherwise.. But reading here in the newsgroups, it seems as if most
schools in the US no longer train them, even if they are still
technically allowed, but not required?

Opinions?

Mark Morissette
Courtice, Ontario, Canada (Flying out of CYOO)
http://oshawapilot.blogspot.com

[Daniel L. Lieberman]

I have been told that there was a high fatility rate during spin training
when it was being universally taught by people who did not specialize in
spin training. Now it is being taught by specialists. I did it 30+ years ago
when I got my private and thought it was fun.

As you know since you can't spin without stalling the lack of actual spins
is probably not a safety matter. Current training on weight and balance
emphasizes the importance of cg as a factor in inadvertent spins which
further alleviates the problem.


"Mark Morissette" > wrote in message
...
> What's eveyrones opinion regarding the lack of spin traning for
> students in the US? I see that there was a thread about this from an
> instructor viewpoint a while back, but not necessarilly from the
> student viewpoint.
>
> Personally, there was only two lessons that I didn't look forward to -
> Spin training, and spiral dives.
>
> Spiral dives turned out to be nothing at all.. 15 minutes, 4 or 5
> spirals, quick and safe recoveries, and that was over. Nothing to it,
> I was worried about something which amounted to easy training.
>
> Spins however, as comfortable of a student as I am, got me a little
> excited. However, we went out, did them, and that was it.
>
> Looking back on things, I'm *very* glad that they are still part of
> the curiculum here in Canada. It's easy to "read" about something
> in the POH and try to cram all that into your cranium should the
> situation ever occur, but...
>
> Can anyone here honestly say that everything they've ever read, versus
> practiced in the air, equals the same training-wise?
>
> For example, if you never had spin training, and suddenly found
> yourself in a spin, would you be confident that everything you "read"
> about them will get you out of it? Yes, you can read what's
> necessary, but can you automatically recall all of that in the air,
> when your first inintentional "lesson" on spins could possibly be at
> 1000AGL in the circuilt?
>
> I've consistently found that lessons practiced quickly become second
> nature, whereas things I've read take much more time to fully grasp
> untill it comes into real-life practice...and there is no substitution
> for the real thing - anyone who has spent time flying MS Flight
> Simulator before flying the real thing can certainly attest to this.
>
> Yes, the spins were not fun.. I wasn't one of the students who were
> so paranoid of them that I was cancelling flights to avoid the
> inevitable, and then ended up in the fetal position on the floor of
> the plane during them - I just wasn't "excited" about them like
> everything else. <grin>
>
> Yep, there was a whole lot more "Ground" in the windscreen all of a
> sudden then I ever want to see again. But I'm glad I did it.
>
> During the actual training, my proficiency with initiating, and (more
> importantly) recovering from the spins gained rapidly. By the 4th or
> 5th spin, I was able to recover consistently and quickly, without much
> "thinking" about what to do, and more "automatically" just doing it.
>
> More importantly, I was in the 100's of feel of alt lost, instead of
> the 1000's in the first spins. If an unintentional spin ever
> happened in the circuit, I'm much more likely to be able to recover
> before hitting terra-firma now, then I would have been initially.
>
> I can't honestly say that if spin training was not part of the
> curriculum here still, that I wouldn't ask for it regardless..fun or
> otherwise.. But reading here in the newsgroups, it seems as if most
> schools in the US no longer train them, even if they are still
> technically allowed, but not required?
>
> Opinions?
>
> Mark Morissette
> Courtice, Ontario, Canada (Flying out of CYOO)
> http://oshawapilot.blogspot.com
>

[Jose]

I enjoyed spins. I think they made me a safer pilot.

AAR they were stopped because there were too many accidents during the
training itself, and it was (overall) "safer" to just let pilots take
their chances - sort of like training for an engine-out by actually
killing the engine.

Jose
(r.a.s retained, though I don't follow that group)
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Doug]

Of course teaching spins is still alllowed. I received spin training
during my private (3 spins). Spin training is required for CFI rating
(which I also have).

I think another consideration is that a lot of training aircraft are
not certified for spins.

But the bottom line was, after they discontinued the spin training,
fatalities from spin training went down. You've had some fatalities
from spin training up there in Canada. At any rate, we now have two
programs, otherwise fairly similar, one with spin training, one
without. Should be able to obtain fairly accurate information on which
program is producing fewer accidents.

[gregg]

Spin training was not part of my PPl curriculum, so I simply went to a Navy
pilot buddy who was also a CFI and asked him to train me, which he did.

Very glad I did it. There are arguments pro and con on PPL spin training
but in this instance I made my own decision and got my own training.

Gregg


Mark Morissette wrote:

> What's eveyrones opinion regarding the lack of spin traning for
> students in the US? I see that there was a thread about this from an
> instructor viewpoint a while back, but not necessarilly from the
> student viewpoint.
>
> Personally, there was only two lessons that I didn't look forward to -
> Spin training, and spiral dives.
>
> Spiral dives turned out to be nothing at all.. 15 minutes, 4 or 5
> spirals, quick and safe recoveries, and that was over. Nothing to it,
> I was worried about something which amounted to easy training.
>
> Spins however, as comfortable of a student as I am, got me a little
> excited. However, we went out, did them, and that was it.
>
> Looking back on things, I'm *very* glad that they are still part of
> the curiculum here in Canada. It's easy to "read" about something
> in the POH and try to cram all that into your cranium should the
> situation ever occur, but...
>
> Can anyone here honestly say that everything they've ever read, versus
> practiced in the air, equals the same training-wise?
>
> For example, if you never had spin training, and suddenly found
> yourself in a spin, would you be confident that everything you "read"
> about them will get you out of it? Yes, you can read what's
> necessary, but can you automatically recall all of that in the air,
> when your first inintentional "lesson" on spins could possibly be at
> 1000AGL in the circuilt?
>
> I've consistently found that lessons practiced quickly become second
> nature, whereas things I've read take much more time to fully grasp
> untill it comes into real-life practice...and there is no substitution
> for the real thing - anyone who has spent time flying MS Flight
> Simulator before flying the real thing can certainly attest to this.
>
> Yes, the spins were not fun.. I wasn't one of the students who were
> so paranoid of them that I was cancelling flights to avoid the
> inevitable, and then ended up in the fetal position on the floor of
> the plane during them - I just wasn't "excited" about them like
> everything else. <grin>
>
> Yep, there was a whole lot more "Ground" in the windscreen all of a
> sudden then I ever want to see again. But I'm glad I did it.
>
> During the actual training, my proficiency with initiating, and (more
> importantly) recovering from the spins gained rapidly. By the 4th or
> 5th spin, I was able to recover consistently and quickly, without much
> "thinking" about what to do, and more "automatically" just doing it.
>
> More importantly, I was in the 100's of feel of alt lost, instead of
> the 1000's in the first spins. If an unintentional spin ever
> happened in the circuit, I'm much more likely to be able to recover
> before hitting terra-firma now, then I would have been initially.
>
> I can't honestly say that if spin training was not part of the
> curriculum here still, that I wouldn't ask for it regardless..fun or
> otherwise.. But reading here in the newsgroups, it seems as if most
> schools in the US no longer train them, even if they are still
> technically allowed, but not required?
>
> Opinions?
>
> Mark Morissette
> Courtice, Ontario, Canada (Flying out of CYOO)
> http://oshawapilot.blogspot.com

--
Saville

Replicas of 15th-19th century nautical navigational instruments:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/backstaffhome.html

Restoration of my 82 year old Herreshoff S-Boat sailboat:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/SBOATrestore.htm

Steambending FAQ with photos:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/Steambend.htm

[Dudley Henriques]

As an American CFI specializing in both primary flight instruction and at
the other end of the spectrum; advanced aerobatic instruction all through my
career in aviation, naturally this issue is well known to me. I've dealt
with it with pilots, instructor seminars, with American aviation
manufacturers and with the FAA here in the states.
After doing all this, my opinion is simply one of many diversified opinions
on this subject.
The short answer is the most popular. As stated, it simply assumes that if
you can avoid the stall; and/or recover from the stall, you can avoid the
spin. Carried a step further, it assumes also that if you possess knowledge
of spins coupled with training in spin awareness, you are safe in the air
environment.
On the other side of this coin, you have a bad incident and accident record
in the United States when dealing with the instructor/student/spin scenario.
These factors couple to produce what we have now for dealing with the
stall/spin accident scenario.
The problem with all this is that it attempts to handle the problem, but in
reality is nothing more than a compromise in training that addresses
specific concerns;
1. It attempts to satisfy the training need while avoiding the area of
highest danger in the training environment; the instructor/student/spin
scenario.
2. It just happens to be extremely appealing to the aircraft manufacturers
lobby in the United States, who have a vested sales interest in projecting
pilot training in a comfortable and favorable condition.

In my opinion, based on my exposure to this environment at all levels, I
believe the present condition concerning spin training in the United States
falls short of what it could have been.
In other words, there can be no doubt considering the accident stats, that
accidents have been avoided by not requiring spin training for certification
as a pilot, but in my opinion, the average proficiency level and overall
confidence level in the pilot community would be higher if spin training was
a requirement. It's that omnipresent tradeoff that always seems to rear it's
ugly head when safety and training comfort levels conflict. Combine this
with some accident data resulting from the instructor/student/spin equation,
and add to that a strong manufacturing lobby seeking comfort levels for
pilot training to make the training as attractive as possible to a
prospective sales marketing base, and you have what we have now in the
United States concerning spin training.
As an aside;
I recommend highly that EVERY student pilot engaged in flight training in
the United States, take it on themselves personally, to seek out a competent
instructor and a suitable aircraft and take some active spin training. Not
only will this training make you a better all around pilot, but it will as
well fill what I consider the most important gap left out of the United
States attitude on spin training; that being a FAMILIARITY through actual
experience with the spin environment. Taking the surprise and potential
panic out of the unusual attitude equation and replacing that with a
familiarity gained through actual hands on experience in the unusual
attitude environment greatly increases the odds of survival for a pilot
suddenly injected into that environment. It shortens the reaction time and
tends to rote the reaction in the correct direction.
Summation on this issue in my opinion is that there is no substitute for
hands on experience in the unusual attitude environment and I can truthfully
say that in my over 50 years of dealing with these issues I have never met a
single pilot.....not ONE single pilot, who wasn't a better BASIC pilot after
having taken unusual attitude and spin training. This to me says it all. You
can be safe............or you can be safer!!! Think about it!!
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)






"Mark Morissette" > wrote in message
...
> What's eveyrones opinion regarding the lack of spin traning for
> students in the US? I see that there was a thread about this from an
> instructor viewpoint a while back, but not necessarilly from the
> student viewpoint.
>
> Personally, there was only two lessons that I didn't look forward to -
> Spin training, and spiral dives.
>
> Spiral dives turned out to be nothing at all.. 15 minutes, 4 or 5
> spirals, quick and safe recoveries, and that was over. Nothing to it,
> I was worried about something which amounted to easy training.
>
> Spins however, as comfortable of a student as I am, got me a little
> excited. However, we went out, did them, and that was it.
>
> Looking back on things, I'm *very* glad that they are still part of
> the curiculum here in Canada. It's easy to "read" about something
> in the POH and try to cram all that into your cranium should the
> situation ever occur, but...
>
> Can anyone here honestly say that everything they've ever read, versus
> practiced in the air, equals the same training-wise?
>
> For example, if you never had spin training, and suddenly found
> yourself in a spin, would you be confident that everything you "read"
> about them will get you out of it? Yes, you can read what's
> necessary, but can you automatically recall all of that in the air,
> when your first inintentional "lesson" on spins could possibly be at
> 1000AGL in the circuilt?
>
> I've consistently found that lessons practiced quickly become second
> nature, whereas things I've read take much more time to fully grasp
> untill it comes into real-life practice...and there is no substitution
> for the real thing - anyone who has spent time flying MS Flight
> Simulator before flying the real thing can certainly attest to this.
>
> Yes, the spins were not fun.. I wasn't one of the students who were
> so paranoid of them that I was cancelling flights to avoid the
> inevitable, and then ended up in the fetal position on the floor of
> the plane during them - I just wasn't "excited" about them like
> everything else. <grin>
>
> Yep, there was a whole lot more "Ground" in the windscreen all of a
> sudden then I ever want to see again. But I'm glad I did it.
>
> During the actual training, my proficiency with initiating, and (more
> importantly) recovering from the spins gained rapidly. By the 4th or
> 5th spin, I was able to recover consistently and quickly, without much
> "thinking" about what to do, and more "automatically" just doing it.
>
> More importantly, I was in the 100's of feel of alt lost, instead of
> the 1000's in the first spins. If an unintentional spin ever
> happened in the circuit, I'm much more likely to be able to recover
> before hitting terra-firma now, then I would have been initially.
>
> I can't honestly say that if spin training was not part of the
> curriculum here still, that I wouldn't ask for it regardless..fun or
> otherwise.. But reading here in the newsgroups, it seems as if most
> schools in the US no longer train them, even if they are still
> technically allowed, but not required?
>
> Opinions?
>
> Mark Morissette
> Courtice, Ontario, Canada (Flying out of CYOO)
> http://oshawapilot.blogspot.com
>

[Matt Whiting]

Dudley Henriques wrote:
> As an American CFI specializing in both primary flight instruction and at
> the other end of the spectrum; advanced aerobatic instruction all through my
> career in aviation, naturally this issue is well known to me. I've dealt
> with it with pilots, instructor seminars, with American aviation
> manufacturers and with the FAA here in the states.
>
> {snip}
>
> Summation on this issue in my opinion is that there is no substitute for
> hands on experience in the unusual attitude environment and I can truthfully
> say that in my over 50 years of dealing with these issues I have never met a
> single pilot.....not ONE single pilot, who wasn't a better BASIC pilot after
> having taken unusual attitude and spin training. This to me says it all. You
> can be safe............or you can be safer!!! Think about it!!
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired

Yes, typical government approach of throwing the baby out with the bath
water. The problem wasn't spin training per se, it was instructors not
proficient in how to conduct spin training. So, rather than address
that root problem, the Feds simply removed the requirement and
discouraged the practice entirely.

I certainly agree that learning to avoid stalls is essential training,
but the reality is that inadvertant stalls still happen and pilots
aren't properly training to handle them. I'd have much rather seen the
FAA focus on developing proper spin training procedures and instructor
training.


Matt

[William W. Plummer]

Mark Morissette wrote:

> What's eveyrones opinion regarding the lack of spin traning for
> students in the US? I see that there was a thread about this from an
> instructor viewpoint a while back, but not necessarilly from the
> student viewpoint.
>
> Personally, there was only two lessons that I didn't look forward to -
> Spin training, and spiral dives.
>
> Spiral dives turned out to be nothing at all.. 15 minutes, 4 or 5
> spirals, quick and safe recoveries, and that was over. Nothing to it,
> I was worried about something which amounted to easy training.
>
> Spins however, as comfortable of a student as I am, got me a little
> excited. However, we went out, did them, and that was it.
>
> Looking back on things, I'm *very* glad that they are still part of
> the curiculum here in Canada. It's easy to "read" about something
> in the POH and try to cram all that into your cranium should the
> situation ever occur, but...
>
> Can anyone here honestly say that everything they've ever read, versus
> practiced in the air, equals the same training-wise?
>
> For example, if you never had spin training, and suddenly found
> yourself in a spin, would you be confident that everything you "read"
> about them will get you out of it? Yes, you can read what's
> necessary, but can you automatically recall all of that in the air,
> when your first inintentional "lesson" on spins could possibly be at
> 1000AGL in the circuilt?
>
> I've consistently found that lessons practiced quickly become second
> nature, whereas things I've read take much more time to fully grasp
> untill it comes into real-life practice...and there is no substitution
> for the real thing - anyone who has spent time flying MS Flight
> Simulator before flying the real thing can certainly attest to this.
>
> Yes, the spins were not fun.. I wasn't one of the students who were
> so paranoid of them that I was cancelling flights to avoid the
> inevitable, and then ended up in the fetal position on the floor of
> the plane during them - I just wasn't "excited" about them like
> everything else. <grin>
>
> Yep, there was a whole lot more "Ground" in the windscreen all of a
> sudden then I ever want to see again. But I'm glad I did it.
>
> During the actual training, my proficiency with initiating, and (more
> importantly) recovering from the spins gained rapidly. By the 4th or
> 5th spin, I was able to recover consistently and quickly, without much
> "thinking" about what to do, and more "automatically" just doing it.
>
> More importantly, I was in the 100's of feel of alt lost, instead of
> the 1000's in the first spins. If an unintentional spin ever
> happened in the circuit, I'm much more likely to be able to recover
> before hitting terra-firma now, then I would have been initially.
>
> I can't honestly say that if spin training was not part of the
> curriculum here still, that I wouldn't ask for it regardless..fun or
> otherwise.. But reading here in the newsgroups, it seems as if most
> schools in the US no longer train them, even if they are still
> technically allowed, but not required?
>
> Opinions?
>
> Mark Morissette
> Courtice, Ontario, Canada (Flying out of CYOO)
> http://oshawapilot.blogspot.com
>
You can take an aerobatic course or maybe just a few lessons. Or, get a
glider certificate where incipient spins are taught.

[Cecil Chapman]

I'm actually looking forward to experiencing them for my CFI training.

Having said that I will say (and it's been done to death) that if the goal
is to prevent deaths from inadvertent spins I believe the effort is doomed
to failure in that almost all the fatalities occur in the well-know
base-to-final scenario where there simply isn't enough vertical distance to
recover. Better to teach coordination in turns and stall recognition,
recovery.

Also there is the 'practical' side of how many student pilots would we lose
after their introduction to spins. Goodness knows, initial exposure to
stalls is already a big issue with fresh students.

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[[email protected]]

snip
Also there is the 'practical' side of how many student pilots would we
lose
after their introduction to spins. Goodness knows, initial exposure to

stalls is already a big issue with fresh students.

Cecil
The apprehension is quite common and normal. The difference is in how a
CFI deals with it and adjusts the training technique to make a student
comfortable with stalls. I feel the same is true with spins.
As a CFI since 1966, and having done literally thousands of spins in a
variety of aircraft, I have long touted the value of good spin
training. My first spin was on my first solo when I was out doing
practice stalls and got sloppy and ended up in a spin. It fascinated me
and I did several more before I went back in to do some T/Go's. when my
CFI asked where I had gone, I told him about the spins, and he simply
said, "OK" and that was that. No big deal. Of course that was in the
late 50's when spins and training in them were a common place thing.
I still maintain the reason for the FAA backing down from spin training
was due to the people making the regs were afraid to do them because of
their own lack of training or proficiency in spins in that transition
time of the 60's/70's.
Most recently I did a short spin session with a student before he went
for his check ride. He told me he was really nervous about it from the
horror stories he had read. I assured him we were not going to do
anything dangerous and he'd be shocked at how relatively mild the whole
thing would be after the fact. Pretty much turned out that way and
calmed his fears that a spin was tatamount to a smoking hole in the
ground.
It almost falls in the same catagory with tailwheel training and
finding someone capable of teaching in them. It has turned into a
mysterious arcane art demanding superior pilot skills, etc, etc, ad
naseum. Such nonsense. Even though spins are required of the CFI
applicant, I often wonder how many of them actually have done them
rather than just get a sign off by a CFI who is afraid to do them and
so the problem propagates itself.
More opportunity for hangar talk.....
Ol Shy & Bashful





-

[Mark Morissette]

>Yes, typical government approach of throwing the baby out with the bath
>water. The problem wasn't spin training per se, it was instructors not
>proficient in how to conduct spin training. So, rather than address
>that root problem, the Feds simply removed the requirement and
>discouraged the practice entirely.

Ok, looking back on most peoples responses here, this seems to be the
concensus - rather then ensure that those who are training the spins
to begin with are sufficiently trained themselves, and flying aircraft
suitable for spin training, the requirement was just removed in the
USA.

IMHO, a bad move, and a band-aid solution.

Like I mentioned, I can say one thing for sure - the spin training I
took as a student here in Canada made me know what to expect, and how
to handle it.

I "read" about spins in the POH and my traning manuals for the week
before I actually flew the lesson. Yep, I had everthing I should have
"needed" to know in my head.

However, I quickly learned after my first actual spin that the real
thing is different then reading about it. There was no doubt the
training helped, as after a few spins (within 10 to 20 minutes), I was
able to recover rapdily after the incipient stage, often loosing only
minimal alittude.

In a base turning final situation, after accomplishing the spin
training, I'm sure the possibility of recovering is much greater for
me, vs. someone who only ever read about it, but never did a spin in
practice.

The fact that there was such a large number of spin training related
accidents in the USA makes me wonder if perhaps alot of instructors
are just not quite up to their task?

My comments are in no way meant to be personal or insulting to any
instructors here, but is this a possibilty? Is this a problem with
instructor ratings perhaps being easier, or a little "too" easy to
obtain in the USA, versus other countries?

With spins being mandatory here, the instructors handle it like any
other lesson, and there doesn't seem to be any worry about it being a
"dangerous" lesson in any regard. Pretty much every week in the peak
seasons, there is some student doing spins in the training area.

At least here, it's dealt with as just another checkmark in the
training logbook..

[george]

We have (or when I was flying) had a exercise entering fully developed
stalls where you were in a takeoff configuration. partial power, full
flap and high nose position to maintain altitude.
This execise is sufficient for sport pilots to recognise the onset of a
spin.
But learning to fly DH82's spin training and air restarts were
mandatory :-))

[houstondan]

general to the group: in spin training, what seems to have been been
the most popular way to screw up? i understand the drill and i'm having
trouble picturing how to mess up that badly in the typical training
cessana starting at maybe 2500' agl.

now that i've got my tailwheel endorsment, spin training is next
(after i gather a few more aluminum cans from beside the highway for
the fliyin fund!).

dan

[george]

houstondan wrote:
> general to the group: in spin training, what seems to have been
been
> the most popular way to screw up? i understand the drill and i'm
having
> trouble picturing how to mess up that badly in the typical training
> cessana starting at maybe 2500' agl.

Using Aileron instead of rudder to pick the wing up after the wingdrop
will make the rest of your day quite boring :-)


> now that i've got my tailwheel endorsment, spin training is next
> (after i gather a few more aluminum cans from beside the highway for
> the fliyin fund!).
>
>
Why is it that the good things cost the most ?

[Dave]

Hmmmm....

I will wait for this answer as well Dan..

We were taught to start all spins at 5000 ft +...never below..

I spin our 172 regularly just to stay sharp at recovery, and besides
that, it's great fun!

I wonder what I would have to screw up to make the "smoking hole" from
5 K, in such a gentle manouver as a spin....

Oh, and if anybody here has NOT done one..

- you don't get "tossed around" inside the aircraft.
- It is gentle on the aircraft...
- Is a non issue with modern gyros
-The g's on recovery seldom exceed 1.5 G's...
- The attitude is VERY unusual,- the windscreen is totally full of
"ground" , and it's rotating, and it REALLY gets your attention! I
believe it is a good idea to do enough of them to eliminate the
"surprise" factor, and have the "automatic reflexes" of recovery kick
into gear early.

There is about 2 - 3 seconds of "oh ****" in your 1st spin that could
kill you close to the ground....

IMHO one should "train out" those first 2-3 seconds and give your
self and passengers a far better chance of survival..

YMMV!

Dave



On 2 Apr 2005 16:55:54 -0800, "houstondan"
> wrote:

>general to the group: in spin training, what seems to have been been
>the most popular way to screw up? i understand the drill and i'm having
>trouble picturing how to mess up that badly in the typical training
>cessana starting at maybe 2500' agl.
>
>now that i've got my tailwheel endorsment, spin training is next
>(after i gather a few more aluminum cans from beside the highway for
>the fliyin fund!).
>
>dan

[Matt Whiting]

houstondan wrote:
> general to the group: in spin training, what seems to have been been
> the most popular way to screw up? i understand the drill and i'm having
> trouble picturing how to mess up that badly in the typical training
> cessana starting at maybe 2500' agl.
>
> now that i've got my tailwheel endorsment, spin training is next
> (after i gather a few more aluminum cans from beside the highway for
> the fliyin fund!).
>
> dan
>

One way that was relayed to me by a crusty old instructor is to have the
student freeze at the controls making it hard for the instructor to
recover from the spin.


Matt

[Mark Morissette]

>general to the group: in spin training, what seems to have been been
>the most popular way to screw up? i understand the drill and i'm having
>trouble picturing how to mess up that badly in the typical training
>cessana starting at maybe 2500' agl.

As someone else mentioned, using aileron instead of rudder.

Admittedly, I almost did it on my first ever spin while
training....it's instinctive, and it's a *hard* habit to break,
especially when you are at such an unusual attitude after the wing
drops and the nose suddenly is pointed towards the ground. :-)

I caught myself in mid-movement of the yoke, and corrected ailerons
back to neutral for the rest of the recovery, but the instinct to
correct with aileron before the plane is actually flying again, and
not stalled, is overwhelming.

On the first one or two spins, there is definately an "oh crap" factor
that causes your hands to override what your head is telling you is
the "right thing" to do.

My instructor suggested that I "Wedge" my elbow somewhere on the door
to prevent me from physically using aileron untill I got past the
actual spin, and have recovered from it. That worked for me, although
after the 3rd spin (I think we did 5 or 6 in the lesson plan) I had it
pretty much down, and really didn't need to do that any longer.

As for 2500 AGL you quoted, that's wayyyyy low.. Our training area
is about 650' asl, and we were climbing through to 4500' before each
spin... It was a comfortable height, and even after recovery from 2
or 3 turns in the spin, I never felt uncomfortably low.

[George Patterson]

houstondan wrote:
> general to the group: in spin training, what seems to have been been
> the most popular way to screw up?

The best way to make it terminal seems to be to get the loading wrong in such a
way that you can't recover from the spin. According to a fellow I spoke to at
the Maule factory, it is nearly impossible to recover in an MX-7 with the CG at
one extreme of the envelope (he did not remember which extreme but thought it
might be aft). Maule placards the aircraft "Intentional spins prohibited."
Between 5 and 10 years ago, two CFIs died in a PA-28 near Solberg when the spin
went flat. The last time this thread surfaced, several people said that loading
is also critical in some models of C-172.

George Patterson
Whosoever bloweth not his own horn, the same shall remain unblown.

[Mark Morissette]

>I spin our 172 regularly just to stay sharp at recovery, and besides
>that, it's great fun!

Curious why are you doing spins in a 172? Your own plane?

Besides it not being allowed unless you are in the Utility W&B
envelope, from everything I've read and understand the 172 is not a
great plane for spin training regardless.

The flightschool I'm at won't allow spin training in their 172's
regardless of W&B within utility... 152's are mandatory when that
portion of the curriculum arrives.

>- you don't get "tossed around" inside the aircraft.

True, although I wouldn't leave my kneeboard or a pen loose in the
cockpit during spins, regardless.

>- It is gentle on the aircraft...

Well, I could debate that one..

>- Is a non issue with modern gyros

From everything I've read, true.

>-The g's on recovery seldom exceed 1.5 G's...

Again, from student to student that could change.. With a good
recovery and plenty of alt, that sounds about right.. I'd be surprised
if I pulled more then 1.5 on the recovery...however, my CFI has
apparently had some "not so pretty" recoveries that resulted in not so
pretty recoveries, which probably exceeded 1.5g by a sizable margin.

>- The attitude is VERY unusual,- the windscreen is totally full of
>"ground" , and it's rotating, and it REALLY gets your attention! I
>believe it is a good idea to do enough of them to eliminate the
>"surprise" factor, and have the "automatic reflexes" of recovery kick
>into gear early.

Yep! My exact resoning behind the fact that I feel spin training
should still be mandatory.

>There is about 2 - 3 seconds of "oh ****" in your 1st spin that could
>kill you close to the ground....

Yep! :-)

[Grumman-581]

"Dave" wrote in message ...
> I wonder what I would have to screw up to make the "smoking hole" from
> 5 K, in such a gentle manouver as a spin....

Switch aircraft and try it in an AA1... That'll get your attention, I
suspect...

[Grumman-581]

"Mark Morissette" wrote in message
...
> As for 2500 AGL you quoted, that's wayyyyy low.. Our training area
> is about 650' asl, and we were climbing through to 4500' before each
> spin... It was a comfortable height, and even after recovery from 2
> or 3 turns in the spin, I never felt uncomfortably low.

The only inadvertant spin that I ever encountered was in an S2B... We were
doing 90 degree bank 90 degree turns and I didn't have the ball centered and
ended up in an accelerated stall and then a roll through 270 degrees in the
opposite direction to the turn in what seemed like less than a second...
Next thing I knew, the nose was pointed towards the ground... I'm not sure
of our altitude since it's been a few years since it happened, but I
seriously doubt that it was more than 2000 ft MSL (which basically equals
AGL in Houston)... Coming out of it was no big deal in the S2B with plenty
of room to spare... The instructor even had time to ask me if I knew what I
had done and how I was going to recover from it...

[tony roberts]

Hmmm.
I've done lots of spin training - in Canada.
There are all kinds of stats, which can be made to say pretty much
anything that you want.

So is the teaching of spins dangerous?
It sure as hell is if you are with a brand new 300 hour CFI.

But would you take spin training with Dudley, or Gene, or Bob, or CJ?
I would. I took my spin training with a 3000 hr CFI. But I sure as hell
wouldn't do it with a newly minted CFI. And yes - I do accept that they
have to practice somewhere - but not on me and not on my dollar.

Oh - and if you happen to own a Cirrus - this discussion doesn't apply
to you - those guys managed to build the first aircraft since WW1 that
can't recover from a spin!

Flame away - it's true!

Tony

In article >,
Mark Morissette > wrote:

> What's eveyrones opinion regarding the lack of spin traning for
> students in the US? I see that there was a thread about this from an
> instructor viewpoint a while back, but not necessarilly from the
> student viewpoint.
>
> Personally, there was only two lessons that I didn't look forward to -
> Spin training, and spiral dives.
>
> Spiral dives turned out to be nothing at all.. 15 minutes, 4 or 5
> spirals, quick and safe recoveries, and that was over. Nothing to it,
> I was worried about something which amounted to easy training.
>
> Spins however, as comfortable of a student as I am, got me a little
> excited. However, we went out, did them, and that was it.
>
> Looking back on things, I'm *very* glad that they are still part of
> the curiculum here in Canada. It's easy to "read" about something
> in the POH and try to cram all that into your cranium should the
> situation ever occur, but...
>
> Can anyone here honestly say that everything they've ever read, versus
> practiced in the air, equals the same training-wise?
>
> For example, if you never had spin training, and suddenly found
> yourself in a spin, would you be confident that everything you "read"
> about them will get you out of it? Yes, you can read what's
> necessary, but can you automatically recall all of that in the air,
> when your first inintentional "lesson" on spins could possibly be at
> 1000AGL in the circuilt?
>
> I've consistently found that lessons practiced quickly become second
> nature, whereas things I've read take much more time to fully grasp
> untill it comes into real-life practice...and there is no substitution
> for the real thing - anyone who has spent time flying MS Flight
> Simulator before flying the real thing can certainly attest to this.
>
> Yes, the spins were not fun.. I wasn't one of the students who were
> so paranoid of them that I was cancelling flights to avoid the
> inevitable, and then ended up in the fetal position on the floor of
> the plane during them - I just wasn't "excited" about them like
> everything else. <grin>
>
> Yep, there was a whole lot more "Ground" in the windscreen all of a
> sudden then I ever want to see again. But I'm glad I did it.
>
> During the actual training, my proficiency with initiating, and (more
> importantly) recovering from the spins gained rapidly. By the 4th or
> 5th spin, I was able to recover consistently and quickly, without much
> "thinking" about what to do, and more "automatically" just doing it.
>
> More importantly, I was in the 100's of feel of alt lost, instead of
> the 1000's in the first spins. If an unintentional spin ever
> happened in the circuit, I'm much more likely to be able to recover
> before hitting terra-firma now, then I would have been initially.
>
> I can't honestly say that if spin training was not part of the
> curriculum here still, that I wouldn't ask for it regardless..fun or
> otherwise.. But reading here in the newsgroups, it seems as if most
> schools in the US no longer train them, even if they are still
> technically allowed, but not required?
>
> Opinions?
>
> Mark Morissette
> Courtice, Ontario, Canada (Flying out of CYOO)
> http://oshawapilot.blogspot.com




--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

[Grumman-581]

"tony roberts" wrote in message
news:nospam-FC7608.22253002042005@shawnews...
> Oh - and if you happen to own a Cirrus - this discussion doesn't apply
> to you - those guys managed to build the first aircraft since WW1 that
> can't recover from a spin!

What about the AA1? NASA had to add a drogue chute to them for their spin
testing...

[Cub Driver]

My instructor followed his own rules, and a spin demonstration was one
of them. That was in 1996.

The demonstration fascinated me enough that a couple years later I
went out to Chandler AZ for spin training and some minor aerobatics.

www.pipercubforum.com/chandler.htm


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net

[Cub Driver]

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 21:46:19 -0400, Dave
> wrote:

>- It is gentle on the aircraft...

Chandler AZ has two Super Cubs. Since I'd never flown at that time, I
asked to do my spin training in a PA-18. They refused because the Cubs
(unlike the Great Lakes trainers they use for aerobatics) have gyro
compasses, and they didn't want to tumble the gyros.

Similarly, Hampton NH prohibits spins in its J-3/L-4 Cubs because of
the age of the aircraft.

So there are two FBOs that don't seem to agree with the gentility of
spins. And I have to say that when I did the spin training in the
Great Lakes, though it was milder than some of the aerobatics I did
later, it was not totally benign. After 90 minutes of it, in the heat,
and driving back to the motel past the stockyard, I sometimes felt
that my own gyros were about to tumble.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net

[Cub Driver]

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 21:38:42 -0500, Mark Morissette
> wrote:

>As for 2500 AGL you quoted, that's wayyyyy low.. Our training area
>is about 650' asl, and we were climbing through to 4500' before each
>spin..

At Chandler AZ, they set the altimeter at field altitude, which was
the same altitude as the desert to the southeast where they did their
training. As I recall, we were always above 4,000 feet before starting
any maneuver.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net

[Neil Gould]

Recently, Mark Morissette > posted:

> What's eveyrones opinion regarding the lack of spin traning for
> students in the US? I see that there was a thread about this from an
> instructor viewpoint a while back, but not necessarilly from the
> student viewpoint.
>
I think the emphasis in the US has shifted toward spin-avoidance. We are
required to perform both climbing (power-on) and descending (power-off)
turning stalls.

Neil

[Matt Whiting]

George Patterson wrote:

> houstondan wrote:
>
>> general to the group: in spin training, what seems to have been been
>> the most popular way to screw up?
>
>
> The best way to make it terminal seems to be to get the loading wrong in
> such a way that you can't recover from the spin. According to a fellow I
> spoke to at the Maule factory, it is nearly impossible to recover in an
> MX-7 with the CG at one extreme of the envelope (he did not remember
> which extreme but thought it might be aft). Maule placards the aircraft
> "Intentional spins prohibited." Between 5 and 10 years ago, two CFIs
> died in a PA-28 near Solberg when the spin went flat. The last time this
> thread surfaced, several people said that loading is also critical in
> some models of C-172.

Loading is important is pretty much all airplanes. Having the CG too
far aft will tend to induce a flatter spin and give the rudder less
authority.

Matt

[Mark Morissette]

>Next thing I knew, the nose was pointed towards the ground... I'm not sure
>of our altitude since it's been a few years since it happened, but I
>seriously doubt that it was more than 2000 ft MSL (which basically equals
>AGL in Houston)... Coming out of it was no big deal in the S2B with plenty
>of room to spare... The instructor even had time to ask me if I knew what I
>had done and how I was going to recover from it...

My point wasn't that it would be impossible to recover safely at the
altitude the other poster quoted, it was that for "Training purposes"
it seemed really low.

Yes, the whole point behind the spin training in my mind is that if it
ever happens while your low and slow (most probable situation, such as
base/final turn) that the recovery could be made before you made a
smoking hole in the ground.

Personally, when I *know* I'm going to be intentionally entering a
spin, I'd prefer to have a few thousand feet between me and the
ground. For that matter, it's written into the CAR's that recovery is
made at least 2000'AGL...Or perhaps 2500AGL, I forget exactly..I
should look it up... It's been a while since I completed the spin
training, and it's one of those numbers thats slipped my mind since.

[[email protected]]

Mark Morissette wrote:
> >Next thing I knew, the nose was pointed towards the ground... I'm
not sure
> >of our altitude since it's been a few years since it happened, but I
> >seriously doubt that it was more than 2000 ft MSL (which basically
equals
> >AGL in Houston)... Coming out of it was no big deal in the S2B with
plenty
> >of room to spare... The instructor even had time to ask me if I knew
what I
> >had done and how I was going to recover from it...
>
> My point wasn't that it would be impossible to recover safely at the
> altitude the other poster quoted, it was that for "Training purposes"
> it seemed really low.

Mark
I've mentioned this before here re:spins and them saving my tender butt
a couple times while finding myself trapped in foggy conditions while
crop spraying in Pawnees. I've spun down twice in small holes while I
had ground contact and recovered at low altitude (2-300'agl). Once was
in Louisiana and the other was in Mozambique. I agree that 3000agl is a
good training entry altitude for spins and that is ample in my opinion.
BTW, I have Canada commercial #C408095 and FAA ATP #1550330
Best Regards
Ol S&B (some say Ol SOB)
>
> Yes, the whole point behind the spin training in my mind is that if
it
> ever happens while your low and slow (most probable situation, such
as
> base/final turn) that the recovery could be made before you made a
> smoking hole in the ground.
>
> Personally, when I *know* I'm going to be intentionally entering a
> spin, I'd prefer to have a few thousand feet between me and the
> ground. For that matter, it's written into the CAR's that recovery
is
> made at least 2000'AGL...Or perhaps 2500AGL, I forget exactly..I
> should look it up... It's been a while since I completed the spin
> training, and it's one of those numbers thats slipped my mind since.

[C J Campbell]

"Mark Morissette" > wrote in message
...
> What's eveyrones opinion regarding the lack of spin traning for
> students in the US? I see that there was a thread about this from an
> instructor viewpoint a while back, but not necessarilly from the
> student viewpoint.

Spin training died with the publication of "Stick and Rudder" by
Langewiesche. It took a few years, but death was inevitable. When this book
became widely accepted, with its emphasis on training in stall avoidance and
its calls for aircraft designs that would not stall, let alone spin, people
became convinced that spin training was both dangerous and unnecessary. Even
rudder pedals would become anachronisms and airplanes would no longer even
be capable of uncoordinated flight. After all, why teach pilots how to
recover from spins when airplanes of the future won't spin?

[C J Campbell]

"houstondan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> general to the group: in spin training, what seems to have been been
> the most popular way to screw up?

Well, maybe not the most popular, but there are also odd things that can go
wrong:

A guy practicing spins in his Citabria down in Borrego Springs managed to
get a loose seatbelt in the empty seat wrapped around the control stick. He
chose to join the Caterpillar Club rather than ride his airplane down (wise
choice).

An instructor and his student in Canada managed to jam the rudder on a
Cessna 152 when a maintenance man made undocumented modifications to the
rudder. Attempts to un-jam it just made it worse. They landed in a lake.
They both survived the initial landing, but the instructor got tangled in
his seat belt and drowned.

[Jeff Gostin]

C J Campbell wrote:

> After all, why teach pilots how to recover from spins when airplanes
> of the future won't spin?

My perspective is one of a student pilot, so I'll happily defer to those
who know more than I do on the topic if it turns out that I'm looking at
this the wrong way. With that said, it seems counterintuitive to not to
perform spin recovery during training for the Private. We spend so much
time and effort learning, drilling, and become proficient at all sorts
of "non-optimal" flying situations (stalls, unusual attitudes, BAI,
engine out, etc etc) that not doing spins seems like a glaring omission.
Should we be trained to recognize the factors that lead to a spin?
Absolutely (we are). Should we be taught how to recover from spins?
Absolutely (we are).

Should we be required to demonstrate that knowledge during the
checkride? Well, that's a call for the FAA, but I believe we should at
least have to earn an endorsement that says we've demonstrated
proficiency during our training. After all, we have to earn a solo
endorsement. Why not a spin endorsement, too? I feel strongly enough
about this that I'll be seeking spin training post-ticket. If it'll help
me become a safer, more knowledgeable, more competent pilot, it's worth
the money. Why would *anyone* want their first experience with
*demonstrated* spin recovery to be when they *need* it? That seems to be
a dangerous gambit. Do I plan on getting into spins routinely? Heck no!!
But, we don't train exclusively for the routine. We train for the
exceptions, too.

As a related question: Does anyone know if the post-ticket fatalities
caused by spins have changed at all since the FAA removed demonstrating
them from the PTS?

Anyway, that's my $.02 on the topic. I'm quite happy to stand corrected
if it turns out I'm off-base here. I look forward to your collective
feedback. :)


--J

[Chixfly2]

After earning my Private, I went on to take spin training (then
Aerobatic Training).

Just because it's not mandatory - doesn't mean it's not a good idea.
More new pilots should realize the value of continued education - and
find ways to get it.

One story about a Cherokee or Cessna getting tossed by turbulence or
jet blast/prop wash might get their attention.

Keep in mind.... It's really your ass up there!

[jsmith]

It's not the spinning that may break the aircraft, it is the recovery.
Let it go too long and build up too much airspeed and pull too hard and,
yes, something may break.

> On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 21:46:19 -0400, Dave
> > wrote:
>>- It is gentle on the aircraft...

> Cub Driver wrote:
> Chandler AZ has two Super Cubs. Since I'd never flown at that time, I
> asked to do my spin training in a PA-18. They refused because the Cubs
> (unlike the Great Lakes trainers they use for aerobatics) have gyro
> compasses, and they didn't want to tumble the gyros.
> Similarly, Hampton NH prohibits spins in its J-3/L-4 Cubs because of
> the age of the aircraft.
> So there are two FBOs that don't seem to agree with the gentility of
> spins. And I have to say that when I did the spin training in the
> Great Lakes, though it was milder than some of the aerobatics I did
> later, it was not totally benign. After 90 minutes of it, in the heat,
> and driving back to the motel past the stockyard, I sometimes felt
> that my own gyros were about to tumble.

[yupyupxav]

>>-The g's on recovery seldom exceed 1.5 G's...
>
>Again, from student to student that could change.. With a good
>recovery and plenty of alt, that sounds about right.. I'd be surprised
>if I pulled more then 1.5 on the recovery...however, my CFI has
>apparently had some "not so pretty" recoveries that resulted in not so
>pretty recoveries, which probably exceeded 1.5g by a sizable margin.
>
Not much more than 2 to 3 G though. During recovery, speed is still
low, AOA high and if you pull too fast, you endup in secondary stall
or spin again... Seen that a lot with my students...

[C J Campbell]

"Dave" > wrote in message
...
> - Is a non issue with modern gyros

Humph. Tell my boss that. He won't allow the 172's to be used for spin
training, citing that it greatly shortens the life of the gyros, knocking
them around from stop to stop.

[george]

Mark Morissette wrote:
> >Next thing I knew, the nose was pointed towards the ground... I'm
not sure
> >of our altitude since it's been a few years since it happened, but I
> >seriously doubt that it was more than 2000 ft MSL (which basically
equals
> >AGL in Houston)... Coming out of it was no big deal in the S2B with
plenty
> >of room to spare... The instructor even had time to ask me if I knew
what I
> >had done and how I was going to recover from it...
>
> My point wasn't that it would be impossible to recover safely at the
> altitude the other poster quoted, it was that for "Training purposes"
> it seemed really low.
>
> Yes, the whole point behind the spin training in my mind is that if
it
> ever happens while your low and slow (most probable situation, such
as
> base/final turn) that the recovery could be made before you made a
> smoking hole in the ground.
>
> Personally, when I *know* I'm going to be intentionally entering a
> spin, I'd prefer to have a few thousand feet between me and the
> ground. For that matter, it's written into the CAR's that recovery
is
> made at least 2000'AGL...Or perhaps 2500AGL, I forget exactly..I
> should look it up... It's been a while since I completed the spin
> training, and it's one of those numbers thats slipped my mind since.

H A S E L
H Height sufficient for recovery 3000 feet AGL
A Area not over a builtup area
S Security hatches harness loose objects secure
E Engine Pressures temps carb heater primer mixture fuel
L Lookout lookout then turn 90 degree lookout turn 180 degree lookout
especially below
set up aircraft for the exercise......

[Dave]

Hi Mark!

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 22:25:42 -0500, Mark Morissette
>Curious why are you doing spins in a 172? Your own plane?

It is available, and yes, we own it...
>
>Besides it not being allowed unless you are in the Utility W&B
>envelope, from everything I've read and understand the 172 is not a
>great plane for spin training regardless.

Correct, the 152 is a far better A/C for this...

It is ONLY spun well inside the "utility" cat...
>
>The flightschool I'm at won't allow spin training in their 172's
>regardless of W&B within utility... 152's are mandatory when that
>portion of the curriculum arrives.
>
>>- you don't get "tossed around" inside the aircraft.
>
>True, although I wouldn't leave my kneeboard or a pen loose in the
>cockpit during spins, regardless.

ALL loose anything is left in the hanger!

>
>>- It is gentle on the aircraft...
>
>Well, I could debate that one..

OK ! :)
>
>>- Is a non issue with modern gyros
>
>From everything I've read, true.
>
>>-The g's on recovery seldom exceed 1.5 G's...
>
>Again, from student to student that could change.. With a good
>recovery and plenty of alt, that sounds about right.. I'd be surprised
>if I pulled more then 1.5 on the recovery...however, my CFI has
>apparently had some "not so pretty" recoveries that resulted in not so
>pretty recoveries, which probably exceeded 1.5g by a sizable margin.

Agreed!

We "practice" spins in the 172, we DO NOT train anyone in it..

Now, this is not often, maybe a couple of spins each every 2 -3
months or so. We just unload the plane of loose gear, and head to a
designated practice area and practice steep turns, stalls, spins and
forced approaches. We are quite hard on each other, and every so
often take an instructor along. Like most of us, we feel we don't fly
enough to stay "nifty" with any aircraft, so we go for flights like
this every so often...




Cheers!

Dave

[Dave]

One of our "anal" preflight checks on our 172 is to be SURE the
rudder squarely contacts the stops on the extreme of travel. Mis-
alignment of these stop screws on a Cessna caused a rudder to jam at
full deflection causing a fatal crash a few yrs ago... :(

Dave

On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 13:11:58 -0700, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>
>"houstondan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> general to the group: in spin training, what seems to have been been
>> the most popular way to screw up?
>
>Well, maybe not the most popular, but there are also odd things that can go
>wrong:
>
>A guy practicing spins in his Citabria down in Borrego Springs managed to
>get a loose seatbelt in the empty seat wrapped around the control stick. He
>chose to join the Caterpillar Club rather than ride his airplane down (wise
>choice).
>
>An instructor and his student in Canada managed to jam the rudder on a
>Cessna 152 when a maintenance man made undocumented modifications to the
>rudder. Attempts to un-jam it just made it worse. They landed in a lake.
>They both survived the initial landing, but the instructor got tangled in
>his seat belt and drowned.
>

[Grumman-581]

"jsmith" wrote in message ...
> It's not the spinning that may break the aircraft, it is the recovery.
> Let it go too long and build up too much airspeed and pull too hard and,
> yes, something may break.

Or the non-recovery... They tend to be rather hard on the aircraft...

[Andrew Sarangan]

Each 172 seems to have different spin characteristics. I have spun a
172N many times during my CFI training. However, I am unable to even
make a half turn spin in our current 172N. It just goes into a steep
spiral. Not sure why. The 152 is a great airplane for spins.





Mark Morissette > wrote in
:

>>I spin our 172 regularly just to stay sharp at recovery, and besides
>>that, it's great fun!
>
> Curious why are you doing spins in a 172? Your own plane?
>
> Besides it not being allowed unless you are in the Utility W&B
> envelope, from everything I've read and understand the 172 is not a
> great plane for spin training regardless.
>
> The flightschool I'm at won't allow spin training in their 172's
> regardless of W&B within utility... 152's are mandatory when that
> portion of the curriculum arrives.
>
>>- you don't get "tossed around" inside the aircraft.
>
> True, although I wouldn't leave my kneeboard or a pen loose in the
> cockpit during spins, regardless.
>
>>- It is gentle on the aircraft...
>
> Well, I could debate that one..
>
>>- Is a non issue with modern gyros
>
> From everything I've read, true.
>
>>-The g's on recovery seldom exceed 1.5 G's...
>
> Again, from student to student that could change.. With a good
> recovery and plenty of alt, that sounds about right.. I'd be surprised
> if I pulled more then 1.5 on the recovery...however, my CFI has
> apparently had some "not so pretty" recoveries that resulted in not so
> pretty recoveries, which probably exceeded 1.5g by a sizable margin.
>
>>- The attitude is VERY unusual,- the windscreen is totally full of
>>"ground" , and it's rotating, and it REALLY gets your attention! I
>>believe it is a good idea to do enough of them to eliminate the
>>"surprise" factor, and have the "automatic reflexes" of recovery kick
>>into gear early.
>
> Yep! My exact resoning behind the fact that I feel spin training
> should still be mandatory.
>
>>There is about 2 - 3 seconds of "oh ****" in your 1st spin that could
>>kill you close to the ground....
>
> Yep! :-)
>

[Cub Driver]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 12:14:49 -0400, Mark Morissette
> wrote:

>Personally, when I *know* I'm going to be intentionally entering a
>spin, I'd prefer to have a few thousand feet between me and the
>ground. For that matter, it's written into the CAR's that recovery is
>made at least 2000'AGL...Or perhaps 2500AGL, I forget exactly..I
>should look it up... It's been a while since I completed the spin
>training, and it's one of those numbers thats slipped my mind since.

The rule of thumb in the Great Lakes was 250 feet per complete
revolution. And I now see, looking back at the article I wrote at the
time, that we stalled the aircraft at 4500 AGL.

When we recovered from the first spin (130 mph in the dive), the Great
Lakes was pulling 3.2 gs. Matt assured me that the Piper Cub was good
for 3.2 gs. I will take his word for it! 3.2 is a lot.




-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net

[Rolf Blom]

On 2005-04-03 07:00, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From: Mark Morissette >
>
>>The fact that there was such a large number of spin training related
>>accidents in the USA makes me wonder if perhaps alot of instructors
>>are just not quite up to their task?
>
>
> I don't think instructors should shoulder the entire burden, although I will
> admit that they can be a contributing factor. I tend to believe the problem
> may lie in the definition of "suitable for spin training". There are just some
> GA trainers out there that, while certified for spins, are really NOT suitable
> for spin training. The limits in aerodynamics and control authority make
> it too easy for spins to get out of hand, especially with a student at the
> controls.
> Now, I'm a strong proponent of spin training for everyone who flys. But I think
> the training should be done in a plane that's designed, built, and certified for
> aerobatics. 'Cause, make no mistake about it, spins are aerobatics. Sure,
> bad things can still happen in aircraft designed for aerobatics. But it gives
> a good instructor a little wider aerodynamic margin to bail a student out of
> something stupid.
> Then, after the training, during that brief moment of inattention that should never
> occur but does, the pilot may instinctively add that one little control movement
> that stops a spin one microsecond after it begins and keeps his Cessna from
> winding up like an end mill and plunging a hole in the ground.
> Of course, the problem with that thought is that there are so few qualified
> instructors and even fewer qualified aircraft.
>

Well, spin training isn't required for PPL in Sweden either, but my club
encourages every student to take a spin-lesson with one of our
acrobatics instructors in a plane suited to the task.
(i.e. no intentional spinning in the Pipers or Cessnas)

/Rolf

[John Galban]

jsmith wrote:
> It's not the spinning that may break the aircraft, it is the
recovery.
> Let it go too long and build up too much airspeed and pull too hard
and,
> yes, something may break.
>

This would be a new one on me. I spin my Cherokee regularly and have
never run across this problem. Are you saying that your airspeed is
building up during the spin? If that's the case, I'd venture to guess
that you are in a spiral dive rather than a spin.

In most of the planes I've spun, airspeed does not increase with the
duration of the spinning. I end up with about the same speed at the
end of one turn or four turns.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting "let it go too long".

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[John Galban]

C J Campbell wrote:
>
> Humph. Tell my boss that. He won't allow the 172's to be used for
spin
> training, citing that it greatly shortens the life of the gyros,
knocking
> them around from stop to stop.

The (non-cageable) gyros in my Cherokee do seem to take a beating
when I'm out doing spins. It's not uncommon for the AI to tumble when
the plane rolls over into the spin entry. I've always assumed that
gyro maintenance was going to be part of the cost of spinning the
plane, but surprisingly, the gyros are just fine. I've been spinning
them regularly for 10 years now and I still haven't had one die on me.


John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[[email protected]]

John
I waa about to address that one as well as high G loads on recovery. It
requires the aircraft to be stalled for the spin, and if its stalled,
the airspeed isn't building! If there is excessive G loading at time of
recovery, it would suggest someone isn't doing a smooth recovery and is
applying way too much control pressures which could result in a
secondary and an unanticipated stall/spin going in a unknown direction?
Been my experience in thousands of spins that the airspeed is well
within the norms and without excessive G loading.
As for the gyros, I haven't seen them deteriorate below IFR standards
after a lot of spins. Once upon a time, back 30-40 years ago that was
not the case.
Best Regards
Ol S&B

[Robert M. Gary]

What really stops spin trainnnig for pilots is instrument training.
Today, FBOs want to be able to use ALL their planes for instrument
instruction. It no longer makes sense to have different aircraft.
Spinning an instrument training aircraft is a really bad idea because
it bangs up the gyros and increases maintenance costs on the gyros. I
would love to give my students spin training in the Cherokee but the
FBO doesn't allow it because its an instrument platform too.

-Robert, CFI

[Dave]

Andrew, - with the 1974 172M the leading edge radius of the airfoil
was increased, making it harder to stall/spin.

Having said that , we have various versions of "when" this ACTUALLY
took place, some suggest it was DURING the M or N model year. You
could have flown the same model/yr, but have had 2 different wings..

Dono, but may be possible...


Dave

On 3 Apr 2005 22:41:57 -0500, Andrew Sarangan
> wrote:

>Each 172 seems to have different spin characteristics. I have spun a
>172N many times during my CFI training. However, I am unable to even
>make a half turn spin in our current 172N. It just goes into a steep
>spiral. Not sure why. The 152 is a great airplane for spins.
>
>
>
>
>
>Mark Morissette > wrote in
:
>
>>>I spin our 172 regularly just to stay sharp at recovery, and besides
>>>that, it's great fun!
>>
>> Curious why are you doing spins in a 172? Your own plane?
>>
>> Besides it not being allowed unless you are in the Utility W&B
>> envelope, from everything I've read and understand the 172 is not a
>> great plane for spin training regardless.
>>
>> The flightschool I'm at won't allow spin training in their 172's
>> regardless of W&B within utility... 152's are mandatory when that
>> portion of the curriculum arrives.
>>
>>>- you don't get "tossed around" inside the aircraft.
>>
>> True, although I wouldn't leave my kneeboard or a pen loose in the
>> cockpit during spins, regardless.
>>
>>>- It is gentle on the aircraft...
>>
>> Well, I could debate that one..
>>
>>>- Is a non issue with modern gyros
>>
>> From everything I've read, true.
>>
>>>-The g's on recovery seldom exceed 1.5 G's...
>>
>> Again, from student to student that could change.. With a good
>> recovery and plenty of alt, that sounds about right.. I'd be surprised
>> if I pulled more then 1.5 on the recovery...however, my CFI has
>> apparently had some "not so pretty" recoveries that resulted in not so
>> pretty recoveries, which probably exceeded 1.5g by a sizable margin.
>>
>>>- The attitude is VERY unusual,- the windscreen is totally full of
>>>"ground" , and it's rotating, and it REALLY gets your attention! I
>>>believe it is a good idea to do enough of them to eliminate the
>>>"surprise" factor, and have the "automatic reflexes" of recovery kick
>>>into gear early.
>>
>> Yep! My exact resoning behind the fact that I feel spin training
>> should still be mandatory.
>>
>>>There is about 2 - 3 seconds of "oh ****" in your 1st spin that could
>>>kill you close to the ground....
>>
>> Yep! :-)
>>