Any Spins Lately??

"Bob Moore" wrote in message
46.128...
Vaughn Simon wrote
I respectfully disagree. AFAIK, Spin training is only "required"
for the CFI rating. Spin training for all other ratings is
optional, so the exception of 91.307 (d) does not apply. (Yes!
I know that there are other opinions around. If your FSDO goes
along with some other reading of that reg, then more power to you.)

You certainly posses no ability to read and comprehend, do you?


Actually, I do. Does an AC trump the clear reading of the CFRs? The FAA
has had several chances to clear this up if it were to so choose, yet it has
passed them up. Why?

Vaughn

Larry Dighera wrote:

What have you found to be the MTBF for your gyros?

As I said, the same gyros have been in the panel and working fine for 14
yrs. and I tend to average about 4 or 5 spins per month. When one of them
finally fails, I'll get back to you.

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

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200709/1

On Sep 4, 8:36 am, Airbus wrote:
You certainly have a proselytizing tone about the subject, yet for your
admonissions to be really valid you would have to show that the change
from spin training to spin awareness and avoidance has been accompanied
by an increase in stall/spin accidents and fatalities. In reality, the
opposite is true.

In article . com,
says...





If you haven't done any spins lately, why not? Have you ever gotten a
good spin checkout? Do you really understand what happens to get you
into a spin? Do you understand what is happening during a spin? Do you
know the proper technique for getting out of a spin in the airplane
you are flying?
Most importantly, do you realize a low altitude spin is virtually a
death sentence? A pilot who is properly trained in spins knows how to
avoid getting into them inadvertantly and especially below 1000'agl.
Every year pilots do a stall/spin accident and people die. Why should
this be? I'm really sick and tired of flight instructors who are
afraid of doing stalls and have NEVER done a spin because they are
afraid of them. How do you think that transfers to their students? I
see it when I do checkouts for pilots who are new to our operation or
request some training or a flight review.
Hopefully this will regenerate some discussion here and maybe save
some lives in the process?
Ol Shy & Bashful - Soaring Buzzard
World Infamous pilot/Instructor- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Airbus
On what do you base that statement "In reality, the opposite is
true." ? I'm basing my statement on what I've seen in 40 years as a
flight instructor.
Cheers
Ol S&B

On Sep 5, 5:52 am, Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:
On Sep 4, 8:36 am, Airbus wrote:



You certainly have a proselytizing tone about the subject, yet for your
admonissions to be really valid you would have to show that the change
from spin training to spin awareness and avoidance has been accompanied
by an increase in stall/spin accidents and fatalities. In reality, the
opposite is true.

In article . com,
says...

If you haven't done any spins lately, why not? Have you ever gotten a
good spin checkout? Do you really understand what happens to get you
into a spin? Do you understand what is happening during a spin? Do you
know the proper technique for getting out of a spin in the airplane
you are flying?
Most importantly, do you realize a low altitude spin is virtually a
death sentence? A pilot who is properly trained in spins knows how to
avoid getting into them inadvertantly and especially below 1000'agl.
Every year pilots do a stall/spin accident and people die. Why should
this be? I'm really sick and tired of flight instructors who are
afraid of doing stalls and have NEVER done a spin because they are
afraid of them. How do you think that transfers to their students? I
see it when I do checkouts for pilots who are new to our operation or
request some training or a flight review.
Hopefully this will regenerate some discussion here and maybe save
some lives in the process?
Ol Shy & Bashful - Soaring Buzzard
World Infamous pilot/Instructor- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Airbus
On what do you base that statement "In reality, the opposite is
true." ? I'm basing my statement on what I've seen in 40 years as a
flight instructor.
Cheers
Ol S&B


The only reasion there aren't more stall/spin accidents
than many years ago, if there ARE fewer, is because the airplanes
built now are so forgiving. They are spin-resistant. Just try getting
a 172 into a decent spin. So now we have the equivalent of tricycles
instead of bicycles, just like we have anti-skid brakes and other
idiot-proofing stuff on our cars. The overall result is a pilot or
driver who thinks he is proficient because the machine never gets away
on him, while the reality is that some engineer was given the task of
designing a machine capable of babysitting him.
I believe many stall/spin accidents come about after a guy
gets his ticket in a newer design, then goes and buys an older
airplane like a Champ or Cessna 140 and promptly gets himself into
trouble. He didn't get any spin training while he was getting the
taildragger checkout. He wasn't shown what happens in a sloppy,
skidding base-to-final turn.

Dan

Airbus wrote:
You certainly have a proselytizing tone about the subject, yet for your
admonissions to be really valid you would have to show that the change
from spin training to spin awareness and avoidance has been accompanied
by an increase in stall/spin accidents and fatalities. In reality, the
opposite is true.



In article . com,
says...

If you haven't done any spins lately, why not? Have you ever gotten a
good spin checkout? Do you really understand what happens to get you
into a spin? Do you understand what is happening during a spin? Do you
know the proper technique for getting out of a spin in the airplane
you are flying?
Most importantly, do you realize a low altitude spin is virtually a
death sentence? A pilot who is properly trained in spins knows how to
avoid getting into them inadvertantly and especially below 1000'agl.
Every year pilots do a stall/spin accident and people die. Why should
this be? I'm really sick and tired of flight instructors who are
afraid of doing stalls and have NEVER done a spin because they are
afraid of them. How do you think that transfers to their students? I
see it when I do checkouts for pilots who are new to our operation or
request some training or a flight review.
Hopefully this will regenerate some discussion here and maybe save
some lives in the process?
Ol Shy & Bashful - Soaring Buzzard
World Infamous pilot/Instructor


I would respectfully disagree with this line of reasoning.
There are various factors involved with the stall/spin issue, and the
present accident stats whatever they are and whatever they show are only
the tip of this iceberg.

If there are negatives showing in the accident statistics, they are not
caused by the base root factor that spin training will make you a better
and a safer pilot. I've been involved directly with aerobatic training
for over 50 years and I will tell you without hesitation that spin
training and/or aerobatic training will absolutely make you a better
everyday or eben weekend pilot.

If anything, negative statistics would indicate that there are serious
problems with the training end of the equation, which there are to be
sure. If the training end is flawed, the end statistics will show that
flaw and the final product (the pilot) will be reflect those flaws, most
likely showing up as a less than desired result in the accident stats.

There have been enough training accidents caused by improperly trained
instructors attempting to give spin instruction to students to have
become a serious safety issue causing much concern about the use of spin
training as a deterrent. This would have to be changed to reflect a more
positive result.

What's needed is a better understanding and acceptance of the basic
premise that spin training is beneficial followed by much better
expertise levels in the instructor community.
Unfortunately I don't see this happening due to FAA reluctance based on
the training safety issue and the combined reluctance of the GA aircraft
manufacturer and the local FBO to have general aviation projected to a
potential customer base as an environment involving spinning the airplane.

I believe spin training will remain as it is for the foreseeable future.
I also believe that spin training is so beneficial to a new pilot that
it should be sought out and accomplished regardless of present
restrictions and mindset.

--
Dudley Henriques

On Sep 5, 10:30 pm, Airbus wrote:


An interesting twist that has come to light from recent AOPA discussions
and rebuttals is that most spin training undertaken by private, commercial
and ATP candidates is done with the ambition of recognizing and avoiding
spins - in other words, virtually no one today really subscribes any
longer to the belief that spin recovery is useful or practicable in the
low-altitude "turn-to-final" scenario, and those students who do practice
spins are mostly interested in avoidance more than recovery.

The turn-to-final stall spin is probably unrecoverable, but
the spin-trained pilot might recognize what's beginning to happen in
time to avert the accident. If nothing else, with spin training he'll
have experienced what Transport Canada calls "intensity," or an eye-
opener, a bit of a scare, that makes a believer out of him. He won't
be so sloppy in that turn to final anymore because he'll be aware of
the cost. When I instructed on Citabrias we did all the scenarios, and
you'd better believe the student had much more respect for the
airplane after that. He knew a lot more than before. And that was the
point.
I watched a guy stall and spin out of a steep turn at low
level and low speed about ten years ago at Arlington. He had been
doing this for some time, and it finally bit him. He might not have
known the danger, and once things began to go wrong he may have done
all the wrong things: pull back to try to raise the nose, and use
opposite aileron to raise that wing. Both are exactly wrong but are
reflexive actions for the non-spin experienced pilot. His first
mistake was to be doing his maneuvers at such low altitude, but he'd
still have spun if he did it up high and might not have recovered
there either. In any case, the crash was non-survivable.
Spins are plenty safe if done properly. They're not hard on
the airplane. We do them in Canada and accidents are rare. The more
dangerous times, IMHO, are the takeoff and landing phases. Not much
room for error.

Dan

In article . com,
says...


Airbus
On what do you base that statement "In reality, the opposite is
true." ? I'm basing my statement on what I've seen in 40 years as a
flight instructor.
Cheers
Ol S&B



On the demonstrable fact that stall/spin accidents have declined at the
same time more emphasis has been placed on avoidance, rather than recovery.
Mind you, I do not say "because" of the change in emphasis in training -
or at least not "exclusively beause of" - there are many factors, including
an improved safety conciousness in a very general sense, and some (as yet
incomplete) impetus from manufacturers - but at least we can state that
the fact that students since 1949 are no longer required to demonstrate
spin recovery proficiency has not led to an increase in stall/spin
accidents, and has to some degree reduced the number of such accidents in
instructional settings (though the NTSB still points out that 90% of
stall/spin fatalities occur with an instructor on board).

An interesting twist that has come to light from recent AOPA discussions
and rebuttals is that most spin training undertaken by private, commercial
and ATP candidates is done with the ambition of recognizing and avoiding
spins - in other words, virtually no one today really subscribes any
longer to the belief that spin recovery is useful or practicable in the
low-altitude "turn-to-final" scenario, and those students who do practice
spins are mostly interested in avoidance more than recovery.

On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 13:01:04 -0700, wrote:

Are parachutes required for spins in the U.S.? Not here in
Canada.

It's not easy to get spin training. My first instructor put the Cub
into a spin to demonstrate what it looked/felt like, but I wasn't
allowed to recover myself. And come to find out, spins are forbidden
by the airport that owns the Cubs. They are, after all, sixty-year-old
airplanes.

So I went out to Chandler AZ to take a course in "unusual attitude"
flying. The plane in that case was a Great Lakes, and I was required
to wear a parachute, but I think that was just an FBO requirement. And
in any event we soon transitioned to some mild aerobatics, for which
the chute was of course required.


Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
new from HarperCollins www.FlyingTigersBook.com

On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 01:24:01 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
wrote:

Actually, I do. Does an AC trump the clear reading of the CFRs? The FAA
has had several chances to clear this up if it were to so choose, yet it has
passed them up. Why?

I think that Catch 22 applies here. As my instructor noted with
respect to solo propping an airplane: "Dan, there are a whole lot of
reasons why you wouldn't want this to become an issue."

As with the 1950s-era French rules of the road (the car on the right
has the right of way; and you must be in control of your vehicle at
all times), I get the impression that with the FAA you are okay as
long as nothing goes wrong. But if something does go wrong, then you
are in trouble.

Having read the discussion here, I would insist on a parachute if I
were to do any more spin training, or if I were a CFI about to
introduce a student to spins.


Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
new from HarperCollins www.FlyingTigersBook.com