Cessna 152 spin integrity

I was watching the 50-something spins done in a 152 on youtube and it
got me thinking;

I seem to remember being taught during commercial training that spins
do not greatly increase G forces on the airplane, is this true?

I also remember being warned "no spin is exactly the same or
predictable, so DON'T do them solo! Was this just a warning from my
school so we wouldn't screw up their gyros or are spins indeed
possibly very dangerous inherently for some reason?

I would like to try some solo next time I'm up just for fun but may
take a willing CFI along (or fellow pilot) just in case.

Would 50-something spins compromise a Cessna 150 or 152's structure?

Another thing I'd be concerned about was getting overly dizzy beyond a
handful of spins.

Ricky

Ricky wrote in news:9430ddc9-22a2-4da2-a803-
:


I was watching the 50-something spins done in a 152 on youtube and it
got me thinking;

I seem to remember being taught during commercial training that spins
do not greatly increase G forces on the airplane, is this true?

Yeah, there's not a lot of G. There are probably some less than natural
loads on some parts of the airplane, but they're obviously not excessive.
The recovery will put a bit on , ocurse 2.5-3 G


I also remember being warned "no spin is exactly the same or
predictable, so DON'T do them solo! Was this just a warning from my
school so we wouldn't screw up their gyros or are spins indeed
possibly very dangerous inherently for some reason?

I would like to try some solo next time I'm up just for fun but may
take a willing CFI along (or fellow pilot) just in case.

Would 50-something spins compromise a Cessna 150 or 152's structure?

No more than a three turn one in that case.It'd sure do somethign to my
head, though!


Another thing I'd be concerned about was getting overly dizzy beyond a
handful of spins.



Well, that can happen anyway. Not that big a deal!


Bertie

One thing that will definitely be different is the CG of the aircraft solo
vs. dual. Also, spins can change as they 'fully develop' and possibly be
difficult to exit. It's not something to experiment with unless you have a
parachute and are ready to use it!

--
Best Regards,
Mike

http://photoshow.comcast.net/mikenoel


"Ricky" wrote in message
...

I was watching the 50-something spins done in a 152 on youtube and it
got me thinking;

I seem to remember being taught during commercial training that spins
do not greatly increase G forces on the airplane, is this true?

I also remember being warned "no spin is exactly the same or
predictable, so DON'T do them solo! Was this just a warning from my
school so we wouldn't screw up their gyros or are spins indeed
possibly very dangerous inherently for some reason?

I would like to try some solo next time I'm up just for fun but may
take a willing CFI along (or fellow pilot) just in case.

Would 50-something spins compromise a Cessna 150 or 152's structure?

Another thing I'd be concerned about was getting overly dizzy beyond a
handful of spins.

Ricky

On Jan 25, 12:55*pm, Ricky wrote:
I was watching the 50-something spins done in a 152 on youtube and it
got me thinking;

I seem to remember being taught during commercial training that spins
do not greatly increase G forces on the airplane, is this true?

I also remember being warned "no spin is exactly the same or
predictable, so DON'T do them solo! Was this just a warning from my
school so we wouldn't screw up their gyros or are spins indeed
possibly very dangerous inherently for some reason?

I would like to try some solo next time I'm up just for fun but may
take a willing CFI along (or fellow pilot) just in case.

Would 50-something spins compromise a Cessna 150 or 152's structure?

Another thing I'd be concerned about was getting overly dizzy beyond a
handful of spins.

Ricky

Not sure if this is a troll or not.....but assuming it is serious,
spins do not create additional G loads any more than normal flight
maneuvers do.
As far as doing them solo? If you haven't done them with a qualified
CFI, and its a damned shame that I even have to qualify that comment,
don't do them solo. Get some training in a proper aircraft.
The number of turns has nothing to do with integrity of the aircraft,
only the recovery
Dizzy is a state of mind as far as doing spins. Visual perceptions
will appear to be going out of control but after you are accustomed to
spins, you can count 1/4 turns and roll out on a specific heading.
Nothing dizzy about it unless you are a genuine blond.
As previously discussed for hundreds of posts and responses, spins
continue to be controversial. Its a damned shame that general aviation
has come to such a poor state when a normal flight maneuver is such a
sore point and continues to kill people every year.
Ol S&B

On Jan 25, 2:34*pm, "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote:

(snipped...)

Hi and thanks for your answer...actually thanks to everyone who
responded to this so far.

What would make you think I am a troll?
Is my question silly, ridiculous, irritating?
FYI I am not a troll, just a comm/inst pilot wanting to do some spins
soon and wanting some advice.

Thanks,

Ricky

Ricky wrote:


I also remember being warned "no spin is exactly the same or
predictable, so DON'T do them solo! Was this just a warning from my
school so we wouldn't screw up their gyros or are spins indeed
possibly very dangerous inherently for some reason?


Sounds like the school didn't have a whole lot of confidence in the spin
training they provided. Assuming you're within the proper weight and CG
envelope, spins should be quite predictable. Particularly in something like a
152.

A local FBO will only allow spins in their Great Lakes aerobatic trainers
(they also have Supercubs and Huskies) because the have cageable gyros. I've
often wondered if this isn't an Old Wives Tale. I've been spinning my
Cherokee on a fairly regular basis since 1994. The gyros often tumble during
spins, but that's never caused a maintenance problem. I've still got the
same gyros in the panel that were there when I bought the plane 14 yrs. ago.
They've never been removed for OH and they're still working fine.

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

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200801/1

"JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe wrote in
news:7ec1fcb50fea9@uwe:

Ricky wrote:


I also remember being warned "no spin is exactly the same or
predictable, so DON'T do them solo! Was this just a warning from my
school so we wouldn't screw up their gyros or are spins indeed
possibly very dangerous inherently for some reason?


Sounds like the school didn't have a whole lot of confidence in the
spin
training they provided. Assuming you're within the proper weight and
CG envelope, spins should be quite predictable. Particularly in
something like a 152.

A local FBO will only allow spins in their Great Lakes aerobatic
trainers
(they also have Supercubs and Huskies) because the have cageable
gyros. I've often wondered if this isn't an Old Wives Tale. I've
been spinning my Cherokee on a fairly regular basis since 1994. The
gyros often tumble during spins, but that's never caused a maintenance
problem. I've still got the same gyros in the panel that were there
when I bought the plane 14 yrs. ago. They've never been removed for OH
and they're still working fine.


Holy Crap! That's amazing!

It definitely wrecks gyros. The one place I worked that had no non gyro
airplanes had one airplane ( cherokee) for spins and it's gyros barely
showed any interest at all.
I suppose it depends on the quality, but it is defnitely not an old
wives tale.


Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .
"JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe wrote in
news:7ec1fcb50fea9@uwe:

Ricky wrote:


I also remember being warned "no spin is exactly the same or
predictable, so DON'T do them solo! Was this just a warning from my
school so we wouldn't screw up their gyros or are spins indeed
possibly very dangerous inherently for some reason?


Sounds like the school didn't have a whole lot of confidence in the
spin
training they provided. Assuming you're within the proper weight and
CG envelope, spins should be quite predictable. Particularly in
something like a 152.

A local FBO will only allow spins in their Great Lakes aerobatic
trainers
(they also have Supercubs and Huskies) because the have cageable
gyros. I've often wondered if this isn't an Old Wives Tale. I've
been spinning my Cherokee on a fairly regular basis since 1994. The
gyros often tumble during spins, but that's never caused a maintenance
problem. I've still got the same gyros in the panel that were there
when I bought the plane 14 yrs. ago. They've never been removed for OH
and they're still working fine.


Holy Crap! That's amazing!

It definitely wrecks gyros. The one place I worked that had no non gyro
airplanes had one airplane ( cherokee) for spins and it's gyros barely
showed any interest at all.
I suppose it depends on the quality, but it is defnitely not an old
wives tale.


Bertie

My recollection is that a "normal" spin entry would tumble the gyros in a
150M, but not in a 152. Apparently, if my recollection of the gimbal limits
is correct, the 150 dipped through 80 degrees nose down on the entry and the
152 did not.

There seems to be a wide variation in the spin entry for various aircraft,
even when the entry is not from an accelerated stall, and there are also a
variety of non-tumbling gyros (in addition to gageable viarieties) in the GA
fleet. All of the cageable gyros that I have personally seen were the old
fashioned varieties (gull-wing horizons and those old DGs that looked like
the whiskey compass in the windshield) which would tumble on any excursion
through 60 degrees of pitch or roll if not gaged.

I have never personally seen any of the newer type gyros which were
cageable, although I presume that they exist. In any case, the newer types
(which can now be close to 40 years old) are certainly more rugged than
their predecessors.

Please treat this as a request for information and comment.

Peter

"Peter Dohm" wrote in
:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .
"JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe wrote in
news:7ec1fcb50fea9@uwe:

Ricky wrote:


I also remember being warned "no spin is exactly the same or
predictable, so DON'T do them solo! Was this just a warning from my
school so we wouldn't screw up their gyros or are spins indeed
possibly very dangerous inherently for some reason?


Sounds like the school didn't have a whole lot of confidence in
the spin
training they provided. Assuming you're within the proper weight
and CG envelope, spins should be quite predictable. Particularly in
something like a 152.

A local FBO will only allow spins in their Great Lakes aerobatic
trainers
(they also have Supercubs and Huskies) because the have cageable
gyros. I've often wondered if this isn't an Old Wives Tale. I've
been spinning my Cherokee on a fairly regular basis since 1994. The
gyros often tumble during spins, but that's never caused a
maintenance problem. I've still got the same gyros in the panel
that were there when I bought the plane 14 yrs. ago. They've never
been removed for OH and they're still working fine.


Holy Crap! That's amazing!

It definitely wrecks gyros. The one place I worked that had no non
gyro airplanes had one airplane ( cherokee) for spins and it's gyros
barely showed any interest at all.
I suppose it depends on the quality, but it is defnitely not an old
wives tale.


Bertie

My recollection is that a "normal" spin entry would tumble the gyros
in a 150M, but not in a 152. Apparently, if my recollection of the
gimbal limits is correct, the 150 dipped through 80 degrees nose down
on the entry and the 152 did not.

Well, that seems kinda strange! The airframes are essentially the
same.The CG would probably be a bit different and maybe they've riggd
the airplane differently ( decalage) I haven't got a lot of time in a
152 and in fact I don't think I've ever taught in one. I can't even
remember what a Cherokee spins like..


There seems to be a wide variation in the spin entry for various
aircraft, even when the entry is not from an accelerated stall, and
there are also a variety of non-tumbling gyros (in addition to
gageable viarieties) in the GA fleet. All of the cageable gyros that
I have personally seen were the old fashioned varieties (gull-wing
horizons and those old DGs that looked like the whiskey compass in the
windshield) which would tumble on any excursion through 60 degrees of
pitch or roll if not gaged.


True enough. sounds plausible, allright. I don't know though. Most of
the airplanes I used to spin had wrecked gyros in no time, though.

I have never personally seen any of the newer type gyros which were
cageable, although I presume that they exist. In any case, the newer
types (which can now be close to 40 years old) are certainly more
rugged than their predecessors.

I've seen them for sale OK. New ones. They're megabucks.

Please treat this as a request for information and comment.


I'm not that scary!



Bertie


Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .
"Peter Dohm" wrote in
:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .
"JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe wrote in
news:7ec1fcb50fea9@uwe:

Ricky wrote:


I also remember being warned "no spin is exactly the same or
predictable, so DON'T do them solo! Was this just a warning from my
school so we wouldn't screw up their gyros or are spins indeed
possibly very dangerous inherently for some reason?


Sounds like the school didn't have a whole lot of confidence in
the spin
training they provided. Assuming you're within the proper weight
and CG envelope, spins should be quite predictable. Particularly in
something like a 152.

A local FBO will only allow spins in their Great Lakes aerobatic
trainers
(they also have Supercubs and Huskies) because the have cageable
gyros. I've often wondered if this isn't an Old Wives Tale. I've
been spinning my Cherokee on a fairly regular basis since 1994. The
gyros often tumble during spins, but that's never caused a
maintenance problem. I've still got the same gyros in the panel
that were there when I bought the plane 14 yrs. ago. They've never
been removed for OH and they're still working fine.


Holy Crap! That's amazing!

It definitely wrecks gyros. The one place I worked that had no non
gyro airplanes had one airplane ( cherokee) for spins and it's gyros
barely showed any interest at all.
I suppose it depends on the quality, but it is defnitely not an old
wives tale.


Bertie

My recollection is that a "normal" spin entry would tumble the gyros
in a 150M, but not in a 152. Apparently, if my recollection of the
gimbal limits is correct, the 150 dipped through 80 degrees nose down
on the entry and the 152 did not.

Well, that seems kinda strange! The airframes are essentially the
same.The CG would probably be a bit different and maybe they've riggd
the airplane differently ( decalage) I haven't got a lot of time in a
152 and in fact I don't think I've ever taught in one. I can't even
remember what a Cherokee spins like..


There seems to be a wide variation in the spin entry for various
aircraft, even when the entry is not from an accelerated stall, and
there are also a variety of non-tumbling gyros (in addition to
gageable viarieties) in the GA fleet. All of the cageable gyros that
I have personally seen were the old fashioned varieties (gull-wing
horizons and those old DGs that looked like the whiskey compass in the
windshield) which would tumble on any excursion through 60 degrees of
pitch or roll if not gaged.


True enough. sounds plausible, allright. I don't know though. Most of
the airplanes I used to spin had wrecked gyros in no time, though.

I have never personally seen any of the newer type gyros which were
cageable, although I presume that they exist. In any case, the newer
types (which can now be close to 40 years old) are certainly more
rugged than their predecessors.

I've seen them for sale OK. New ones. They're megabucks.

A friend was showing around a couple of copies of Aviation Consumer at a
meeting earlier today. One of them did indeed have pictures of two brands
of cageable artificial horizons, but circumstances did not permit me to find
the price, and both of the gyros shown were electric. A quick web search
was not informative as to the cost of TSO'd vacuum powered gyros with the
cageable feature,as would be used as a replacement part for a typical
trainer, but it does appear that you are correct--they are expensive and the
DGs would be similar.

Please treat this as a request for information and comment.


I'm not that scary!


That didn't apply to any one person, and someone might know something that
the rest of us have missed.

Peter