Chris,

Some gentle reminders about reality here in the UK..


The vast majority of the UK training fleet does not
comprise of Puchasz's. Indeed you find clubs that solely
use them for ab-initio training (not many) and clubs
that have one as a spin/aerobatic trainer. Indeed the
BGA operates one (99) partly for this purpose. All
the other clubs have to soldier on with dull old K13's
for spin/stall awareness/avoidance training..

On the other hand some clubs have taken the view that
where there is smoke there is fire, and although no
one analytically has managed to determine why these
accidents seem to follow the Puchasz in the UK, these
clubs take an avoidance strategy. My own view for what
it's worth is that it is an aircraft with a big elevator
and a big rudder that loses more height per turn in
a spin than a K7/13, and if you screw up the recovery
will reverse. But it's an honest aircraft and from
my experience does what it's told to do. I would be
happy to operate one from my own club from aerotow,
but remain to be convinced it's an aircraft I would
want to be used on the wire.

It's also worth understanding that the Puch has acquired
a somewhat hairy chested reputation and bar stories
tend to grow in scariness like fishing stories increase
the size of the fish..

For instance our airfield is situated on top of a small
ridge.. When we spin train we try and spin over the
valley, which gives us about another 300 ft.. Guess
how many people actually factor this into their post
spin exercise in bar debrief.. ?

Again and again the UK instructors have pointed out
here that we're not teaching spinning we're teaching
spin avoidance.. However in my and my instructors panels
view that requires us to demonstrate and then get students
to understand how spins happen and then recover from
them - from cable breaks, from underbanked, over ruddered
turns and from thermalling turns..

People who don't train in spin avoidance often tend
to get confused about the different phases of spinning.
Anyone who manages to autorotate, and then spin for
one turn in a Puchasz (or any other glider for that
matter) from 800 ft AGL is clearly a lunatic.. Demonstrating
a departure at somewhat higher altitude is a different
matter..

Just a quick comment on parachutes from Mark Boyds
later post you mean that in the US you do not wear
parachutes in gliders as a matter of routine? and it's
permitted to do aerobatics without them? From a UK
perspective that seems criminally negligent and we
accept the cost of running parachutes for all seats
in all club gliders as simply something it would be
inconceivable to do.. And yes, they have saved lives...


And of course here in the UK we look with some amusement
at the social darwinism in the US that allows 40 million
people to choose not to have access to health care,
the preventative effect on the murder rate that widespread
handgun ownership has, and the preventative affect
on crime of a prison incarceration rate about eight
times the european average..






At 16:06 07 February 2004, Chris Ocallaghan wrote:
'I know of one instructor who was asked to start to
spin a Puchacz at
800
feet above the ground as part of his annual instructor
check. There is
no
room for error if you are deliberately initiating a
full spin at such
a
low level.'

Wouldn't it be better to initiate the practice spin
at 3,000 feet,
then check the altitude at the bottom of the recovery?
I am very
confident in my ability to recognize and recover from
a spin, but I
would NEVER, NEVER, NEVER enter one intentionally at
800 feet AGL, if
for no other reason than spinning in the pattern would
be frowned on
at most airports I frequent. Nor would I put my life
into someone
else's hands quite so readily. From 800 feet there
is very little
opportunity to take control and sort out a recovery
gone awry.

The most surprising aspect of the Puchacz discussion
to date is the
number of accidents involving instructors. This led
me to believe that
perhaps there was something amiss with the aircraft
(which may be the
case). But clearly there are training practices in
place in Britain
that should be scrutinized. Frankly, if a CFI asked
me to spin from
800 agl, I'd consider it a test of my judgment, the
only appropriate
response being, 'Let's land and take another tow.'

I've always thought the Brits pretty sensible. Is this
a form of
hazing among the fraternity of BGA flight instructors?
It is very
difficult to justify such extreme measures for the
sake of
proficiency. (Will he keep his head on straight when
the ground is
rushing madly at him? And if he doesn't, then what?)
Or is it a
vestige left over from a time when aircraft design
was less regulated
and spin entries were common? Or both?

You've heard of social Darwinism? Perhaps this is organizational
Royalism: training philosophies shaped by too many
generations of
inbreeding....

I have to say, from outside looking in, it's just a
little
frightening.