C172 and Spins

Dan wrote:
On Mar 19, 5:07 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

Believe it or not, when we travel we don't even reserve ahead. We just
go until we get tired then find a place to stay. We've had fantastic
luck doing this and have never had a situation where we couldn't find a
great place to stay.
Flying is another matter of course. Your choices are fine. We've used them.

--
Dudley Henriques

I *used* to do that, until a trip to ISP turned into a 3 hour drive to
BFE NJ to a Holiday Inn (not express).

So I've joined the ranks of the "planners."

It doesn't sit well with my adventurous side, but there it is.



Dan Mc

My wife calls it "an adventure" :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

On Mar 19, 5:33 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:


My wife calls it "an adventure" :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

Sounds like a keeper!

On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:03:09 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Roger wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 18:38:38 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Dan wrote:
Anyone else have expereince with the C172E (1964)?

No matter what I did I could not get that bird to spin to the right.

Left spins take some work, and power helps (of course).

But right it just wallows and then steep spirals.



Dan Mc
Try accelerating the stall a bit just before reaching the 1g stall point .
Decelerate the airplane carrying just a bit of power into the stall,
then just before it would break naturally, apply aggressive pitch, as
the stall breaks, apply full pro-spin rudder. It should break a lot
cleaner and right into the spin; assuming normal rigging.

Of course an extra bit of enthusiasm could lead to a snap roll. :-))
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com


Timing Rog....TIMING!!! With women and flying.......it's all in the
TIMING!!!! :-)))

Yup, and if your timing is off on either they are likely to give you
an attitude adjustment along with a new outlook on life.:-))




Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:28:21 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Dave Doe wrote:
In article ,
says...
Roger wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 18:38:38 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Dan wrote:
Anyone else have expereince with the C172E (1964)?

No matter what I did I could not get that bird to spin to the right.

Left spins take some work, and power helps (of course).

But right it just wallows and then steep spirals.



Dan Mc
Try accelerating the stall a bit just before reaching the 1g stall point .
Decelerate the airplane carrying just a bit of power into the stall,
then just before it would break naturally, apply aggressive pitch, as
the stall breaks, apply full pro-spin rudder. It should break a lot
cleaner and right into the spin; assuming normal rigging.
Of course an extra bit of enthusiasm could lead to a snap roll. :-))
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Timing Rog....TIMING!!! With women and flying.......it's all in the
TIMING!!!! :-)))

Question on this - snap rolls can put some big strains on the a/c - so I
presume the a/c (most 172's I've flown, actually make that *all* - are
in the normal cat, not utility) - is aerobatic? - or at least in the
utility category?

I snap rolled a Traumahawk years ago when I performed a stall turn
(himmelman (sp?) - call it what you like) - when I whacked the rudder
in while I was (obviously) still above stall speed. I ended up flick
rolling and upside down and recovered just fine - but it scared the chit
out of me (the turning force was really quite considerable).

Opinions?

Only one. Don't snap a normal OR a utility category airplane. It ain't
healthy! :-)) Neither category comes near meeting aerobatic category
standards.
I would strongly suggest from reading what you say you were doing with a
Tomahawk that you not continue that practice PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Two things I'd like to add and Dudley please correct me if I'm wrong.
(I know I didn't need to say that :-)) ) I've only done basic
aerobatics and even that has been quite a while.

The weakest part of an airplane is the tail section or empennage.
Regular and Utility category airplanes along with no few basic
aerobatic planes were never meant to go backwards. That is the
reason hammerheads were removed from the accepted maneuvers for 152
Aerobats. They may have put them back, but I don't know.

At any rate when doing hammerheads and even stall turns and
chandelles (in planes rated for them) never, ever let it slide
backwards. With the hammerhead you are going straight up so even a
tiny delay in the reverse could be disastrous. You can easily fold
that tail right up along side the fuselage and they don't fly worth a
darn after that.

The other is snap rolls. Snap rolls can cover a wide range of stress
both on the airplane and pilot. I've heard the snap roll described as
one of the most uncomfortable maneuvers for new pilots. Think of it
this way. The airplane is basically flying in a straight line. It
then goes to a high angle of attack and rotates around the
longitudinal axis. That means you go from a hefty +G to sideways
flight, to negative G at about the same as the positive G, then
sideways again and finally back to the original attitude. Most of the
planes we fly are rated for very little in the way of negative G and
these forces are applied abruptly in the snap roll. Dudley knows
better than I how much force a snap can put on the tail/empennage, but
should the pilot screw up the maneuver it can be well beyond that
required for structural failure.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Roger wrote:
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:03:09 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Roger wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 18:38:38 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Dan wrote:
Anyone else have expereince with the C172E (1964)?

No matter what I did I could not get that bird to spin to the right.

Left spins take some work, and power helps (of course).

But right it just wallows and then steep spirals.



Dan Mc
Try accelerating the stall a bit just before reaching the 1g stall point .
Decelerate the airplane carrying just a bit of power into the stall,
then just before it would break naturally, apply aggressive pitch, as
the stall breaks, apply full pro-spin rudder. It should break a lot
cleaner and right into the spin; assuming normal rigging.
Of course an extra bit of enthusiasm could lead to a snap roll. :-))
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Timing Rog....TIMING!!! With women and flying.......it's all in the
TIMING!!!! :-)))

Yup, and if your timing is off on either they are likely to give you
an attitude adjustment along with a new outlook on life.:-))




Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

At first glance the control inputs seem similar, but there are subtle
differences between the two maneuver entries.
There is no doubt that if mishandled, a ham handed pilot could initiate
a snap roll, but if done the way I suggested, the result should only be
an erect spin entry in an airplane like a 172.

The difference in the two inputs is that to initiate a snap, you need an
airspeed higher than for the spin entry but below Va, and the entry is
different. For the snap, you raise the nose to entry airspeed and
briskly apply full RUDDER in the desired roll direction. This is
FOLLOWED almost immediately with full back stick to cause an acellerated
stall. You need almost perfect timing to get it just right. Although
it's two control inputs, they are "jointed together" as one.
For the spin entry, you are simply leading a 1g stall at a very low
energy state with a pitch input without the rudder lead until the stall
breaks. As it breaks, you THEN apply pro-spin rudder to yaw the wing
into auto rotation.
I've never seen a snap roll develop from the spin entry input. The
controls are out of sequence; the timing is different; and the energy
state at initiation is not high enough to snap an airplane like a 172.

--
Dudley Henriques

On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 20:06:59 GMT, "JGalban via AviationKB.com"
u32749@uwe wrote:

Tina wrote:
Some SEL airplanes are not certified for spins. I assume the 172 isn't
in that group.

I'm pretty sure that all of the older 172s (before production restarted in
'97) are approved for intentional spins in the Utility Category. Not sure
about the later models.

The nice thing about the 172 is that it's pretty easy to get it into the
Utility Category. My Cherokee, on the other hand, requires some careful W&B
to fit into its relatively narrow U.C. envelope. I'd spin it a lot more if
it wasn't such a pain.

Our 180 was pretty easy to get into the Utility category. Then after
several years I found that placard on the panel "Spin Entry from full
stall only" was a mistake and it wasn't certified for spins.

Recovery from a fully developed spin was interesting. It'd make one
full turn after the application of opposite rudder as if you'd done
nothing. Then it'd stop in about a half turn.

I saw two videos, IIRC from Piper. The first was a Archer with 4 guys
in it. (no way was that in the utility category). Flat spin all the
way to the ocean. I'm not sure about the other but I think it was a
Cherokee 180. It too went into a flat spin with no recovery.


John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Roger wrote:
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:28:21 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Dave Doe wrote:
In article ,
says...
Roger wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 18:38:38 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Dan wrote:
Anyone else have expereince with the C172E (1964)?

No matter what I did I could not get that bird to spin to the right.

Left spins take some work, and power helps (of course).

But right it just wallows and then steep spirals.



Dan Mc
Try accelerating the stall a bit just before reaching the 1g stall point .
Decelerate the airplane carrying just a bit of power into the stall,
then just before it would break naturally, apply aggressive pitch, as
the stall breaks, apply full pro-spin rudder. It should break a lot
cleaner and right into the spin; assuming normal rigging.
Of course an extra bit of enthusiasm could lead to a snap roll. :-))
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
Timing Rog....TIMING!!! With women and flying.......it's all in the
TIMING!!!! :-)))
Question on this - snap rolls can put some big strains on the a/c - so I
presume the a/c (most 172's I've flown, actually make that *all* - are
in the normal cat, not utility) - is aerobatic? - or at least in the
utility category?

I snap rolled a Traumahawk years ago when I performed a stall turn
(himmelman (sp?) - call it what you like) - when I whacked the rudder
in while I was (obviously) still above stall speed. I ended up flick
rolling and upside down and recovered just fine - but it scared the chit
out of me (the turning force was really quite considerable).

Opinions?

Only one. Don't snap a normal OR a utility category airplane. It ain't
healthy! :-)) Neither category comes near meeting aerobatic category
standards.
I would strongly suggest from reading what you say you were doing with a
Tomahawk that you not continue that practice PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Two things I'd like to add and Dudley please correct me if I'm wrong.
(I know I didn't need to say that :-)) ) I've only done basic
aerobatics and even that has been quite a while.

The weakest part of an airplane is the tail section or empennage.
Regular and Utility category airplanes along with no few basic
aerobatic planes were never meant to go backwards. That is the
reason hammerheads were removed from the accepted maneuvers for 152
Aerobats. They may have put them back, but I don't know.

At any rate when doing hammerheads and even stall turns and
chandelles (in planes rated for them) never, ever let it slide
backwards. With the hammerhead you are going straight up so even a
tiny delay in the reverse could be disastrous. You can easily fold
that tail right up along side the fuselage and they don't fly worth a
darn after that.

The other is snap rolls. Snap rolls can cover a wide range of stress
both on the airplane and pilot. I've heard the snap roll described as
one of the most uncomfortable maneuvers for new pilots. Think of it
this way. The airplane is basically flying in a straight line. It
then goes to a high angle of attack and rotates around the
longitudinal axis. That means you go from a hefty +G to sideways
flight, to negative G at about the same as the positive G, then
sideways again and finally back to the original attitude. Most of the
planes we fly are rated for very little in the way of negative G and
these forces are applied abruptly in the snap roll. Dudley knows
better than I how much force a snap can put on the tail/empennage, but
should the pilot screw up the maneuver it can be well beyond that
required for structural failure.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Let me jump in here if I may :-))

A snap roll is positive g all the way around if inside or negative all
the way around if outside. It's not uncomfortable t all to the pilot. In
fact, if done correctly, it's quite comfortable. You apply pro snap
controls and watch it go around. Trust me it's no big whoop :-))
BTW, the little Aerobat was certified for snaps and did a great snap roll.
Now, as to the Hammerheads and the tail issue.
Many of the light training type aerobatic airplanes are NOT certified
for tail slides, nor is it a good idea to get into one. If you do, you
simply hold the elevators rock solid neutral and wait for the airplane
to swap ends, which it will.
There is no reason for anyone to tail slide out of a hammerhead if
rudder is applied at the right point on the up line. The aircraft will
pivot rather than slide backward. You really have to be sound asleep to
tail slide backwards, and instructors always cover the alternate
procedures involved if you do.

Hope I cleared this up. :-)))


--
Dudley Henriques

On Mar 20, 12:27 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:

I've never seen a snap roll develop from the spin entry input. The
controls are out of sequence; the timing is different; and the energy
state at initiation is not high enough to snap an airplane like a 172.

--
Dudley Henriques

I was thinking as I was reading your post "There's no way the 145 hp
172 is going to make it that far into that maneuver!"

These old 172 have too much surface, too little power.


Dan Mc

Roger wrote:
Our 180 was pretty easy to get into the Utility category.

Really? Mine is a pain. The U.C. range is only a few inches wide, so I
have to carefully balance the fuel vs. cockpit load. It's actually easier
when I take an instructor along in the right seat.

I saw two videos, IIRC from Piper. The first was a Archer with 4 guys
in it. (no way was that in the utility category). Flat spin all the
way to the ocean. I'm not sure about the other but I think it was a
Cherokee 180. It too went into a flat spin with no recovery.

One of the reasons for the very narrow envelope in the Cherokee is that the
spin tends to flatten pretty dramatically as the C.G. moves rearward. Even
in the utility category, I can feel the spin flattening after the 3rd or 4th
turn, when the C.G. is up against the rear limit in the U.C.

Most early model (pre '73) Cherokee 140s and 180s are approved for
intentional spins. The exceptions are models with air conditioning, or the
big fresh air fan in the tail. Any of the post '73 stretched fuselage
models (Challengers, Warriors, Archers, ...) are prohibited because the
stretched fuselage and the much larger stabilator moved the C.G. too far back.


Originally, some of the stretched '73 models were released with placards
and manuals that indicated that intentional spins were approved. After Piper
caught on that the C.G. change was just too much, an AD was issued to
rescind spin approval (removing placards and manual entries) for all of the
stretched models. The lowly 140 kept its spin approval until they quit
making it in '77.

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

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

On Mar 20, 1:03 pm, "JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe wrote:

One of the reasons for the very narrow envelope in the Cherokee is that the
spin tends to flatten pretty dramatically as the C.G. moves rearward. Even
in the utility category, I can feel the spin flattening after the 3rd or 4th
turn, when the C.G. is up against the rear limit in the U.C.

Most early model (pre '73) Cherokee 140s and 180s are approved for
intentional spins. The exceptions are models with air conditioning, or the
big fresh air fan in the tail. Any of the post '73 stretched fuselage
models (Challengers, Warriors, Archers, ...) are prohibited because the
stretched fuselage and the much larger stabilator moved the C.G. too far back.

Originally, some of the stretched '73 models were released with placards
and manuals that indicated that intentional spins were approved. After Piper
caught on that the C.G. change was just too much, an AD was issued to
rescind spin approval (removing placards and manual entries) for all of the
stretched models. The lowly 140 kept its spin approval until they quit
making it in '77.

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


I haven't flown a 140 in a long time -- are they still spinnable?

(There's one for sale locally)

What did you do to get the airplane in a condition where the "C.G. is
up against the rear limit in the U.C?"

Seems to me if you were heading out to do spins you'd want no more
than two people (both up front), nothing loose in the airplane, and no
anvils in the baggage area.


Dan Mc