View Single Post
  #8  
Old January 23rd 04, 10:42 PM
SNOOP
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Folks would like to plod through life thinking that they will
recognize the good old nose up, stall, kick rudder, this must be the
entry to a spin, I can recover from this. Who wouldn't.

The one we like to pound into their memory is the nose level on the
horizon, cross control (over shooting the final)feed in top aileron,
and away you go into the nicest spin entry. Recognize it and recover.
We don't need to let it wind up either.

Again a good cirriculum lets you do this training with a high degree
of safety, if the instructor is properly trained.


Stewart Kissel wrote in message ...
OK JJ, I'll bite (sorta)-

With spin entry training being done so often in benign-handling
ships, what in fact are we teaching/learning?

'Pull back, Pull back, okay kick in full rudder'-and
the thinking might go-'Gee, how does anyone get into
a spin, this is way to much work'

How does this apply the first time someone gets in
a ship that may fall off on its own?



At 18:24 23 January 2004, Mark James Boyd wrote:
In article ,
JJ Sinclair wrote:
It's winter, I'm bored and I haven't started any good
controversies (this year)
so here goes:

In the early 50's the USAF had a policy to give jump
training to all aircrew
personnel. They soon learned that they were getting
twice the injuries in
training that they were experiencing in real bail-outs.
They decided to stop
the actual jump training and just give PLF and kit
deployment, etc training.

So, JJ asks, In light of recent events that show its
been reining Puchaz's, Do
we really want to teach full blown spins? Isn't spin
entry and immediate
recovery, all we should be doing?

JJ Sinclair


With three times as many fatalities in training than
flying (helicopters),
one wonders the wisdom of practicing hundreds of autorotations
during
helicopter training as well.