A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Puchaz spin count 23 and counting



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 5th 04, 10:40 AM
henell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Puchaz spin count 23 and counting


Bill Daniels said,
*Rather than blame the glider, I would point the finger at training
that doesnt equip pilots with the skills needed to fly these gliders*
I tend to agree. Have umpteen hours in Puchii. I have always found them
very predictable if flown within C of G limits. Have never had a
problem with spin recovery if the correct technique is employed. If
treated like a Blanik (when auto rotating) and back pressure alone is
released, they definitely will not come out. The full correct drill
must be applied. I have found no recovery problem with 8 or more turn
spins during aerobatic sequences.
HOwever, as indicated it probably would not hurt for a recap by those
with the skills regarding any nasty that may be lurking. Remove the
doubt once and for all.
Henry


--
henell
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted via OziPilots Online [ http://www.OziPilotsOnline.com.au ]
- A website for Australian Pilots regardless of when, why, or what they fly -

  #2  
Old February 6th 04, 03:30 PM
Shoulbe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I've never flown one and haven't looked at the manual - is the recovery you've
employed detailed in the manual?
  #3  
Old February 6th 04, 09:42 PM
Edward Colver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
(henell) wrote:


Bill Daniels said,

I have found no recovery problem with 8 or more turn
spins during aerobatic sequences.


In one of the many messages on Puchaczs over the last two weeks, I believe
someone said that the Puchacz was only certified by the Poles for a two
turn full spin. If I am correct, then maybe the message above shows why
this glider has acquired some of its bad reputation. Pilots should stick
to the manufacturers or flying authorities limits.

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.

In the UK a great deal of all spin training is done in Puchaczs. At our
club we have three Puchaczs. We routinely have visitors who come to our
club and ask to do spinning because they believe that the two seaters used
in their clubs are incapable of proper spin training.

Twenty years ago I was thermalling with an instructor over a ridge. We
were approx 500 feet above the trees in a Bocian with the instructor
flying in a weak thermal. Without any warning to me, on my fifth flight
ever, the Bocian went in to a full spin. We were very close to the trees
by the time the instructor recovered.

This episode convinced me that full spin training is essential. There are
many people who have been flying low and slow trying to extend their
flight time and have suddenly found themselves in incipient or full spins.
How well they recover from these frightening episodes is entirely
dependant on how well they have been trained to recover from full spins.

In summary I believe that the Puchaczs poor reputation is not deserved. A
one or two turn spin done with plenty of height is not dangerous.


  #4  
Old February 6th 04, 10:14 PM
Bill Daniels
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Edward Colver" wrote in message
. co.uk...
In article ,
(henell) wrote:


Bill Daniels said,

I have found no recovery problem with 8 or more turn
spins during aerobatic sequences.


I didn't write the above. Somebody else did.

Bill Daniels


In one of the many messages on Puchaczs over the last two weeks, I believe
someone said that the Puchacz was only certified by the Poles for a two
turn full spin. If I am correct, then maybe the message above shows why
this glider has acquired some of its bad reputation. Pilots should stick
to the manufacturers or flying authorities limits.

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.

In the UK a great deal of all spin training is done in Puchaczs. At our
club we have three Puchaczs. We routinely have visitors who come to our
club and ask to do spinning because they believe that the two seaters used
in their clubs are incapable of proper spin training.

Twenty years ago I was thermalling with an instructor over a ridge. We
were approx 500 feet above the trees in a Bocian with the instructor
flying in a weak thermal. Without any warning to me, on my fifth flight
ever, the Bocian went in to a full spin. We were very close to the trees
by the time the instructor recovered.

This episode convinced me that full spin training is essential. There are
many people who have been flying low and slow trying to extend their
flight time and have suddenly found themselves in incipient or full spins.
How well they recover from these frightening episodes is entirely
dependant on how well they have been trained to recover from full spins.

In summary I believe that the Puchaczs poor reputation is not deserved. A
one or two turn spin done with plenty of height is not dangerous.



  #5  
Old February 6th 04, 10:21 PM
Edward Colver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Bill Daniels said,

I have found no recovery problem with 8 or more turn
spins during aerobatic sequences.


I didn't write the above. Somebody else did.

Bill Daniels


Apologies.
Using "cut and paste" can lead to mistakes.
  #7  
Old February 7th 04, 05:03 PM
Chris OCallaghan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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.
  #8  
Old February 7th 04, 05:53 PM
Mark James Boyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
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.


Presumably this was over the radio, and nobody liked him anyway?
I read some of these altitudes folks are doing this stuff, and
I put my head in my hands...

When I did aerobatics, it was always 5000ft floor (expected termination
of the manuever) if you had chutes, 3000 feet floor if no chutes.
  #9  
Old February 8th 04, 12:18 PM
Mark Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.




  #10  
Old February 8th 04, 04:54 PM
Vaughn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mark Stevens" wrote in
message ...
Chris,


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..


I tend to agree; but in the US, spin training is not required for any
glider or airplane ticket except CFI. As a student, I made the choice to
not solo any spinnable trainer without spin training. As a CFIG, I have
conformed to the "party line" and sent many students solo with only stall
avoidance, recognition and recovery training; without any hint of a problem.
I think (and suggest) that these people should seek spin training before
moving on to more demanding ships.

...
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..


Agree emphaticaly.

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?


Yes, that is true. In my experience, most owners of single-seat glass
wear parachutes, but most clubs and commercial operations using 2-seat
gliders do not. It is just part of the culture. I think part of the reason
for this is the disincentive created by the US requirement that all chutes,
regardless of technology, be repacked every 120 days. An out-of-date chute
discovered in any operating aircraft is an invitation for an expensive and
inconvenient FAA violation notice.

and it's
permitted to do aerobatics without them?


Under certain conditions...yes.

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...


I don't disagree, like helmets on motorcycles, it is (or is not) part
of the local safety culture and the majority naturally conform. That said,
is chute use normal in all small UK aircraft, or is it just gliders? If
only gliders, why?

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,


Most of those 40 million people did not make that choice for
themselves, it was made for them. I think that the European 2-tier
(public/private) model of medical care has great merit.

the preventative effect on the murder rate that widespread handgun

ownership has,

A persistant hangover from our old cowboy culture.

and the preventative affect on crime of a prison incarceration rate about

eight
times the european average..


The rate is truly astounding for young black males in the US.



Vaughn


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Inside A U.S. Election Vote Counting Program Peter Twydell Military Aviation 0 July 10th 03 08:28 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.