hoooooolllllyyyyyyyy s**t......
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since there is no overall stretching in this case strain is the amount of movement. This still allows the concept of a breaking strain, which will reduce with fatigue.
The paper clip failing is because you have loaded the metal up past its Yield stress into plastic deformation hence high strains and work hardening which as I stated early put you at the very top of the S-N curve ie 100% stress which put you into the area of very low cycles to failure. Which i might add is a completly different mode of failure to the high cycle fatigue which is due to cracks migrating until the critcal crack intensity is reached. But the load that is able to be supported is the same until very late on in the fatigue life.
But you still don't seem to grasp that structures do not fail due to strain they fail due to stress. Which is defined as the load in newtons divided by the area it is applied over.
Yes I am saying the forces on the tail are alot less due to vortexs coming off the wing. They are applied on a lever and not as a constant force which is why it flutters (technical term is bluff body dynamics). As the air speed increase it is on the squared law so if side slipping double the speed 4 times the load at full rudder 3 times 9 etc. Its effects of controls part 1 fast firm controls slow sloppy controls etc.
The reason why I take exception is there is so much bollocks talked about tail flutter with persudo engineering talk used as justification. And if people believe this bollocks a prefectly good training aircraft will continue to have a crap reputation due to FI's who don't know any better continuing the bollocks.
MJ
Last edited by mad_jock; 19th Apr 2004 at 13:16.
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 51
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually the reason I wouldn't spin a Tomahawk is that it has a T tail. As I said, I was being light-hearted, never intended to suggest that the tail would actually fail, with my comments really refering to confidence. I personally would assume it would come out of a spin, but I see no reason to spin an aircraft which is specifically designed with poor stall-recovery characteristics.
Your comments explain why the tail flutters - well it is accepted that it does and I understand flutter, but my point was not that the flutter has any control effect at all. Control reversal (or at a lesser severity reduction of control effectiveness) occurs due to twisting caused by the aerodynamic forces from the control, not from flutter.
Your comments explain why the tail flutters - well it is accepted that it does and I understand flutter, but my point was not that the flutter has any control effect at all. Control reversal (or at a lesser severity reduction of control effectiveness) occurs due to twisting caused by the aerodynamic forces from the control, not from flutter.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go on then I am going to bite.
Please explain why a High T light aircraft is any harder to unstall than a low T aircraft? Or for that matter why it is any nastier to stall than a Low T. The tommahawk is actually harder for the student to put into the stall than the cessnas. The fact they actually have to fly it properly thus training them properly is neither here nor there.
You may say jokingly that you don't mean that the tail will fail. But there are numerous FI's out there who use exactly the same arguments that you have used as a reason to not fly them or stall them. Spinning is a personal thing if your no comfy with an aircrafts handeling don't do it. But all FI's should be able to do a clean stall in any training aircraft.
I don't really see the reason to spin any aircraft to be honest. But if you let go of the controls in the stall it recovers all by its self, if you push the nose forward it recovers, if you put the power up it recovers. Whats poor about that?
Spinning once in the spin if you neutralise the controls select min power and apply opp rudder it comes out after a turn. So whats poor about it?
I agree about control reversal but in the tail fin its way to stiff especially in the Piper and cessna configurations for rudder reversal to occur.
All you are doing is promoting the bollocks that is spoken about the tommahawk. Your trying to justify to yourself that its dangerous when it isn't any more dangerous than spinning any other aircraft within the limits specified in the POH.
MJ
Please explain why a High T light aircraft is any harder to unstall than a low T aircraft? Or for that matter why it is any nastier to stall than a Low T. The tommahawk is actually harder for the student to put into the stall than the cessnas. The fact they actually have to fly it properly thus training them properly is neither here nor there.
You may say jokingly that you don't mean that the tail will fail. But there are numerous FI's out there who use exactly the same arguments that you have used as a reason to not fly them or stall them. Spinning is a personal thing if your no comfy with an aircrafts handeling don't do it. But all FI's should be able to do a clean stall in any training aircraft.
but I see no reason to spin an aircraft which is specifically designed with poor stall-recovery characteristics.
Spinning once in the spin if you neutralise the controls select min power and apply opp rudder it comes out after a turn. So whats poor about it?
I agree about control reversal but in the tail fin its way to stiff especially in the Piper and cessna configurations for rudder reversal to occur.
All you are doing is promoting the bollocks that is spoken about the tommahawk. Your trying to justify to yourself that its dangerous when it isn't any more dangerous than spinning any other aircraft within the limits specified in the POH.
MJ
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I,m going back a bit now, from memory i seem to remember that the spin itself wasn't much of a problem re; breaking tails, but the very steep nose down attitude and clean design allowing very rapid increase in speed, which could panic the pilot into too rapid a pull up and breaking something.
Got to admit the Tomahawk is the only aircraft ive been in and seen my life pass before me. Always make sure you read the ( i seem to remember) 3 pages on how to spin the tomahawk in the flight manual.
Got to admit the Tomahawk is the only aircraft ive been in and seen my life pass before me. Always make sure you read the ( i seem to remember) 3 pages on how to spin the tomahawk in the flight manual.
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 51
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M_J
The T tailplane sits in disturbed air from the mainplane in a stall. This means that the elevator has less authority (that should certainly have been taught on your principles of flight course). It may also be the reason that the aircraft is difficult to stall, as the loss of authority may be coming in early.
All light aircraft can be recovered from a spin in the standard configuration, it is part of the proving of the aircraft. However there can be other factors, such as fuel imbalance, that can make the spin recovery significantly more difficult. Although I see good reason to spin for training purposes, I see no reason to do so in a T-tailed aircraft.
The T tailplane sits in disturbed air from the mainplane in a stall. This means that the elevator has less authority (that should certainly have been taught on your principles of flight course). It may also be the reason that the aircraft is difficult to stall, as the loss of authority may be coming in early.
All light aircraft can be recovered from a spin in the standard configuration, it is part of the proving of the aircraft. However there can be other factors, such as fuel imbalance, that can make the spin recovery significantly more difficult. Although I see good reason to spin for training purposes, I see no reason to do so in a T-tailed aircraft.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It may loose as a small amount of authority due to the turbulence from the vortexs. But the main factor is it dosn't benifit from prop wash. Which is a more marked effect, giving the student less authority putting the plane into a stall at low power due to reduced air flow over the back end. Recovering from the stall is as quick and responsive (if not better) as any other training aircraft in my experence using the standard techniques. Which is 300 hours on 150's 152's 172's and 700hrs on PA38's and 100hrs on PA28's. And come to think of it 6 hrs in a seminole which has very similar stall handling as the PA38 from what I can remember and 49hrs in a Cougar which stalls like the PA28.
And to be honest as the elevator has nothing to do with the stall recovery in a spin its not really a factor in this dicussion. As posted previously when you correct the spin the biggest worry is busting Vne.
And as for the ATPL principles of flight course, which i don't think i have deviated from yet. I think I will stick to the principles of flight I used to teach to under graduates on there degree courses backed up by the basic priciples of structural engineering and fluid dynamics. Along with running labs in the wind tunnels with the spotty perverts for 2 years.
Before you start about super stalls on large high T aircraft yes I know about them. We are talking about only a SEP training aircraft.
You are just showing how the bollocks about the PA38 is so popular and unfortunatly believed by many.
MJ
And to be honest as the elevator has nothing to do with the stall recovery in a spin its not really a factor in this dicussion. As posted previously when you correct the spin the biggest worry is busting Vne.
And as for the ATPL principles of flight course, which i don't think i have deviated from yet. I think I will stick to the principles of flight I used to teach to under graduates on there degree courses backed up by the basic priciples of structural engineering and fluid dynamics. Along with running labs in the wind tunnels with the spotty perverts for 2 years.
Before you start about super stalls on large high T aircraft yes I know about them. We are talking about only a SEP training aircraft.
You are just showing how the bollocks about the PA38 is so popular and unfortunatly believed by many.
MJ
Last edited by mad_jock; 23rd Apr 2004 at 13:04.
I remember spinning an early tomahawk (before the stall strips were added) and finding it very exciting.
After the first fatal accidents a CAA test pilot came up with a document describing several different spins possible in the type, with different recovery recommendations for each.
The hinges on the rudder, I remember, had lots of washers used as spacers. If the wrong number of washers were present, with full rudder and full up elevator the controls could jam against each other in the tail!
After the first fatal accidents a CAA test pilot came up with a document describing several different spins possible in the type, with different recovery recommendations for each.
The hinges on the rudder, I remember, had lots of washers used as spacers. If the wrong number of washers were present, with full rudder and full up elevator the controls could jam against each other in the tail!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After reading some of the assumptions that certain individuals have posted on this forum I think it is a good idea that you stay away from Tomahawks. I’ve actually been quite amused by the comment made by the so called “Tomahawk expert” on this forum
People here either like the aircraft or hate it. If you don't like the T- tail, the way it spins or its "poorly or flimsy tail" and design characteristics, that's fine. Nobody is forcing you to fly one. But don't post absurd assumptions about this aircraft, when:
1. You have never flown one
2. You have no technical knowledge of the aircraft
3. Have limited total aviation experience and knowledge
and
4. You have never consulted the POH or even spoken to any highly experienced PA-38 owners or pilots.
mad_jock
The Tomahawk WILL NOT come out of an incipient spin unassisted. You said that you would “get it to flick through into a spin using roll to correct wing drop” and “it requires such a horrendous attitude I don't think your average PPL would even come close to getting it into that part of the envelope”. Then what have been the main reasons SPL PPL and CPL holders have not been able to recover from spins, resulting in fatal accidents? I wonder what was the reason was that they were unable to recover? You also stated” the elevator has nothing to do with the stall recovery in a spin“ that is ridiculous.
I’m not sure how “altering the airflow round the back end” would cause the trim springs to not provide enough tension, maybe you could elaborate? Just out of interest, when was the last time the trim springs were changed in the aircraft it question?
Regards,
QFTJT
International Piper Tomahawk Club
People here either like the aircraft or hate it. If you don't like the T- tail, the way it spins or its "poorly or flimsy tail" and design characteristics, that's fine. Nobody is forcing you to fly one. But don't post absurd assumptions about this aircraft, when:
1. You have never flown one
2. You have no technical knowledge of the aircraft
3. Have limited total aviation experience and knowledge
and
4. You have never consulted the POH or even spoken to any highly experienced PA-38 owners or pilots.
mad_jock
The Tomahawk WILL NOT come out of an incipient spin unassisted. You said that you would “get it to flick through into a spin using roll to correct wing drop” and “it requires such a horrendous attitude I don't think your average PPL would even come close to getting it into that part of the envelope”. Then what have been the main reasons SPL PPL and CPL holders have not been able to recover from spins, resulting in fatal accidents? I wonder what was the reason was that they were unable to recover? You also stated” the elevator has nothing to do with the stall recovery in a spin“ that is ridiculous.
I’m not sure how “altering the airflow round the back end” would cause the trim springs to not provide enough tension, maybe you could elaborate? Just out of interest, when was the last time the trim springs were changed in the aircraft it question?
Regards,
QFTJT
International Piper Tomahawk Club
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't say I am an expert by any stretch.
I quite agree that once your in a fully developed spin its either recovery action or hit the ground.
The comment was mainly for if the student doesn't catch the wing drop and releases everything the plane will accelerate and take its self out usually with a fairly steep nose drop but you are correct its not a cert.
As for the problems. In the uk there are some fairly stricked rules about spinning them.
1. 4 point harness
2. No more than half tanks, the more fuel the faster it rotates.
3. Entry is right back to full stall then gently let the wing drop into the spin without huge amounts of rudder input.
4. And no more than 3 rotations I think.
As someone else has posted its about 3 pages in the POH.
And as with all flight tests pre cert they can't cover all modes of spinning. The usual method of teaching spin entry in the UK in C152 etc is to flick them in with rudder input (and some keep the rudder input on until it really gets going). Which is against what the POH says for the tommy. Which I might add doing a reverse flick into the spin is definatly not allowed in the POH on purpose.
Also local conditions may be different to what the aircraft was tested in.
Which all leads the plane getting into a mode of spinning which was never tested. This isn't just the problem of PA38's. There have been plenty of cases with other aircraft where the Pilot has had to use techniques outside the standard eg increasing power to get more air over the rudder. In fact my FIC instructor managed to get into one of these modes with a C152 which it wouldn't recover with full rudder input and increased the power which forunately recovered it.
I can't and won't presume what happen in the incidents but I should imagine bits of the above will apply. And due to the high rotation rate and height loss compared to some types you have alot less time to play with it to get it to recover. To much fuel in is really scary about 1" below the cross is my max.
Elevator in the spin. During a fully developed spin the only effective control is rudder. Yes I know you can roll in the tomahawk and it will go from nose down to flat and back again. (NOT recommend again its not in the POH). The only time the elevator becomes effective again and unstalls, is when the spin is recovered using rudder and the plane starts flying again. This can be seen if the student has some forward input on the control the plane will neg G bunt into an even steeper nose down attitude (which is why i think its stalled). The elevator comes in when you have to recover the nose down attitude before the wings come off through busting Vne which was why there was the cracking problem at the fin root with people hauling it back. It may be a feature of the High T that the elevator is stalled in the spin due to lack of prop wash, but i havn't stuck any string on the back end to see if it is.
Trim springs as you know its proberly one of the worst features of the machine. I was only making a educated guess as to why the plane pitches when teaching yaw. I must admit the 2 I instructed in had new springs and I didn't notice any pitch change. You could be right, its a feature of old tired springs.
MJ
I quite agree that once your in a fully developed spin its either recovery action or hit the ground.
The comment was mainly for if the student doesn't catch the wing drop and releases everything the plane will accelerate and take its self out usually with a fairly steep nose drop but you are correct its not a cert.
As for the problems. In the uk there are some fairly stricked rules about spinning them.
1. 4 point harness
2. No more than half tanks, the more fuel the faster it rotates.
3. Entry is right back to full stall then gently let the wing drop into the spin without huge amounts of rudder input.
4. And no more than 3 rotations I think.
As someone else has posted its about 3 pages in the POH.
And as with all flight tests pre cert they can't cover all modes of spinning. The usual method of teaching spin entry in the UK in C152 etc is to flick them in with rudder input (and some keep the rudder input on until it really gets going). Which is against what the POH says for the tommy. Which I might add doing a reverse flick into the spin is definatly not allowed in the POH on purpose.
Also local conditions may be different to what the aircraft was tested in.
Which all leads the plane getting into a mode of spinning which was never tested. This isn't just the problem of PA38's. There have been plenty of cases with other aircraft where the Pilot has had to use techniques outside the standard eg increasing power to get more air over the rudder. In fact my FIC instructor managed to get into one of these modes with a C152 which it wouldn't recover with full rudder input and increased the power which forunately recovered it.
I can't and won't presume what happen in the incidents but I should imagine bits of the above will apply. And due to the high rotation rate and height loss compared to some types you have alot less time to play with it to get it to recover. To much fuel in is really scary about 1" below the cross is my max.
Elevator in the spin. During a fully developed spin the only effective control is rudder. Yes I know you can roll in the tomahawk and it will go from nose down to flat and back again. (NOT recommend again its not in the POH). The only time the elevator becomes effective again and unstalls, is when the spin is recovered using rudder and the plane starts flying again. This can be seen if the student has some forward input on the control the plane will neg G bunt into an even steeper nose down attitude (which is why i think its stalled). The elevator comes in when you have to recover the nose down attitude before the wings come off through busting Vne which was why there was the cracking problem at the fin root with people hauling it back. It may be a feature of the High T that the elevator is stalled in the spin due to lack of prop wash, but i havn't stuck any string on the back end to see if it is.
Trim springs as you know its proberly one of the worst features of the machine. I was only making a educated guess as to why the plane pitches when teaching yaw. I must admit the 2 I instructed in had new springs and I didn't notice any pitch change. You could be right, its a feature of old tired springs.
MJ
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Elevator in the spin. During a fully developed spin the only effective control is rudder. ... The only time the elevator becomes effective again and unstalls, is when the spin is recovered using rudder and the plane starts flying again.
If one maintains nose up elevator in a spin, how will the wings become unstalled? And if the wings remain stalled, how will autorotation cease? I think the elevator is effective in a spin, but less than normal due to high angle of attack and high slip angle at the aft end of the fuselage. So by itself it will not necessarily effect a spin recovery.
With the exception of the Robin 2160, I don't know of a GA manufacturer-recommended spin recovery that does not involve elevator use to assist spin recovery. Note I'm talking about fully developed spins here.
The only time AFAIK that the elevator is completely ineffective is in a truly flat spin, at 90° angle of attack. Parachute time!
Having said that, thanks for taking the time on stress/strain explanations - very informative.
cheers,
Oktas8
Join Date: May 2002
Location: southcoast
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here at goodwood,we spin the Tomahawk on a regular basis,and provided you recover as per the POH then the A/c will behave exactly as any other.
It is also a fantastic A/C for stall training,as it stalls properly therefore making the student more aware of this maneuver and the correct recovery techniques, unlike the PA28 that we also have and in which the stall can be a complete non event thus making it not the best platform for teaching stalling on.
And to those of you who have "been told by somebody" to avoid the PA38...(Clown in particular)....I suggest you try it for yourself before passing on negative information you have on an A/C you haven't even flown.......
It is also a fantastic A/C for stall training,as it stalls properly therefore making the student more aware of this maneuver and the correct recovery techniques, unlike the PA28 that we also have and in which the stall can be a complete non event thus making it not the best platform for teaching stalling on.
And to those of you who have "been told by somebody" to avoid the PA38...(Clown in particular)....I suggest you try it for yourself before passing on negative information you have on an A/C you haven't even flown.......
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 865
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe a student managed to lodge themselves forward across the instructors lap which must have been fun at the time.
Spin left if the student is female, spin right if not.....
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the recovery procedures that I have seen require you to neutralise the controls, power to idle then apply opp rudder to direction of spin in there most basic form. While in the fully developed spin you can wiggle the yoke as much as you like and it won't recover the plane. It will have some other effects, but it won't get you out of it. This is only talking about normal spins which a PPL instructor would teach.
Some types recommend a bunt forward on the controls (Cessna I think says a firm shove forward which I have yet needed to do) after rotation has stopped. The wings don't unstall until after the rotation stops at which point you are usually pointing at a fairly steep angle towards the ground and you will accelerate very quickly towards Vne the last thing most people think about is shoving the nose forward. They are much more likely to pull it back hard with the possibility of stalling again or bending something. Instead of the smooth control input to level the aircraft before busting Vne.
Another common mistake on early spin lessons is for the student to leave full rudder applied after the rotation has stopped which can cause a bit of fun.
MJ
Some types recommend a bunt forward on the controls (Cessna I think says a firm shove forward which I have yet needed to do) after rotation has stopped. The wings don't unstall until after the rotation stops at which point you are usually pointing at a fairly steep angle towards the ground and you will accelerate very quickly towards Vne the last thing most people think about is shoving the nose forward. They are much more likely to pull it back hard with the possibility of stalling again or bending something. Instead of the smooth control input to level the aircraft before busting Vne.
Another common mistake on early spin lessons is for the student to leave full rudder applied after the rotation has stopped which can cause a bit of fun.
MJ
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok I'll bite that hook mad_jock!
I agree with your comments, except with reservations for elevator use. You're describing a Muller-Beggs recovery, also recommended by some manufacturers as you said. However, Neil Williams, Szurovy & Goulian, this author and the FAA point out that in many aircraft a positive check forward may be needed on occasion. IMO it is sending altogether the wrong message to pilots, to say that the elevator does not play an effective role in spin recovery. It may not, it will not in some aircraft most of the time.
The brisk forward movement (aft if inverted) of the control column occurs before spin recovery not after - no point at all if the aircraft has already stopped rotating. I had an aerobatically rated student once who was not checking forward in the A152, but relying on recovery on rudder alone. I entered a spin with partial power (as for a power-on stall), and closed the throttle after two rotations - the aircraft would not recover without a check forward, which surprised the student very greatly. Naturally, one will need to ease out of the ensuing dive fairly briskly, but that is the case for many spins. Most piston engined aircraft will not get anywhere near VNE unless power is on or forward pressure is maintained.
I realise mad_jock you qualified your post as referring to spins taught by a PPL instructor. In this country we do not distinguish between different types of instructor this way, so this discussion may be getting more advanced that you intended.
Anyhoo, cheers, O8
I agree with your comments, except with reservations for elevator use. You're describing a Muller-Beggs recovery, also recommended by some manufacturers as you said. However, Neil Williams, Szurovy & Goulian, this author and the FAA point out that in many aircraft a positive check forward may be needed on occasion. IMO it is sending altogether the wrong message to pilots, to say that the elevator does not play an effective role in spin recovery. It may not, it will not in some aircraft most of the time.
The brisk forward movement (aft if inverted) of the control column occurs before spin recovery not after - no point at all if the aircraft has already stopped rotating. I had an aerobatically rated student once who was not checking forward in the A152, but relying on recovery on rudder alone. I entered a spin with partial power (as for a power-on stall), and closed the throttle after two rotations - the aircraft would not recover without a check forward, which surprised the student very greatly. Naturally, one will need to ease out of the ensuing dive fairly briskly, but that is the case for many spins. Most piston engined aircraft will not get anywhere near VNE unless power is on or forward pressure is maintained.
I realise mad_jock you qualified your post as referring to spins taught by a PPL instructor. In this country we do not distinguish between different types of instructor this way, so this discussion may be getting more advanced that you intended.
Anyhoo, cheers, O8
Last edited by Oktas8; 1st May 2004 at 05:50.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It may not, it will not in some aircraft most of the time.
I agree I was intending to discuss C152 and PA38's and other training aircraft which are commonly used at flying schools.
Must admit I have quite enjoyed thinking about the engineering side of things with the tommy. And I can see a wee trip with string taped under the leading edge and left over the top to see if the elevator is stalled in the spin with the tommy. And maybe some strain wax on the empange to see where the max stress occurs.
To be honest I was a structural engineer who was forced into doing fluid dynamics for thermo problems and wind loads on structures. Navier Stokes always drove me to drink and I could never be bothered waiting the 6 days it took to get the computer to spit out a CFD solution (and the barstard usually didn't converge at some point on the last day)
And as for the tommy getting near Vne, O yes it will quite happly sail through it within about 5-10 seconds after the rotation stops. Which is why people where over stressing the fin root and they had to put a plate in which I think is inspected every 150hours.
Anyhow the whole subject of spinning isn't one of standard solutions every aircraft is different. The POH is the bible. If the POH says don't spin it, don't. And if it says recover one way do it.
MJ
And the tommahawk is a bloody good training aircraft.
Last edited by mad_jock; 1st May 2004 at 09:10.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Philippines
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I have always enjoyed instructing in the Tomahawk. I accept it is not to everyone's liking - I'm not attracted to Ford Mondeos...but many are!
As for spinning - most of my more amusing stories relating to flying relate to spinning the Tomahawk:
1. The time I turned round and looked at the tail!
2. The time the engine stopped
3. The time I first spun the Tomahawk and felt 'unwell' - not from motion sickness, but from a sense that it wasn't going to recover (unfortunately hadn't been told/read that the rate of rotation increases when you effect a recovery!)
Happy days!
As for spinning - most of my more amusing stories relating to flying relate to spinning the Tomahawk:
1. The time I turned round and looked at the tail!
2. The time the engine stopped
3. The time I first spun the Tomahawk and felt 'unwell' - not from motion sickness, but from a sense that it wasn't going to recover (unfortunately hadn't been told/read that the rate of rotation increases when you effect a recovery!)
Happy days!
MJ -
Just for the avoidance of doubt (in case anyone is following this thread and does not have much spin experience) the Standard Spin Recovery is:
Power off, ailerons neutral, FULL rudder opposite TI, short pause, stick progressively forward (or rearward if g is negative) until rotation stops. Rudder is NEEDED to decrease the rate of yaw, elevator is NEEDED to decrease the angle of attack. Unless the POH says do something different, or you are a highly experienced aerobatic pilot, stick to the standard spin recovery.
Someone else mentioned the Beggs-Mueller method: this requires that the stick is floating (not in your hand!) and does not work in a number of aircraft.
All the recovery procedures that I have seen require you to neutralise the controls, power to idle then apply opp rudder to direction of spin in there most basic form
Power off, ailerons neutral, FULL rudder opposite TI, short pause, stick progressively forward (or rearward if g is negative) until rotation stops. Rudder is NEEDED to decrease the rate of yaw, elevator is NEEDED to decrease the angle of attack. Unless the POH says do something different, or you are a highly experienced aerobatic pilot, stick to the standard spin recovery.
Someone else mentioned the Beggs-Mueller method: this requires that the stick is floating (not in your hand!) and does not work in a number of aircraft.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NZ
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you think spinning an Axe is fun, try spinning a Beech Skipper...
There have been, I think, two Tomahawks that lost their tails in New Zealand... one off Wanganui, not sure about the other. I seem to recall that the Wanganui one lost its tail downwind in the circuit.
I enjoyed instructing in the Tomahawk, miles better than a 152 (but then, I have wide shoulders). Not particularly impressed by the build quality though...
There have been, I think, two Tomahawks that lost their tails in New Zealand... one off Wanganui, not sure about the other. I seem to recall that the Wanganui one lost its tail downwind in the circuit.
I enjoyed instructing in the Tomahawk, miles better than a 152 (but then, I have wide shoulders). Not particularly impressed by the build quality though...
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Wirral penninsula
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally i dont like them
Ive instructed on them so think i qualify to post an opinion.They are a very interesting a/c to stall and spin.One of the clubs i instructed at had several in the fleet and the stall behavior was different from one to the other.One in particular being a fierce wing drop at the stall if there was even a slight bit of yaw present.Although some are approved for spinning having had what i believe is the tail modification,i was never happy spinning in them.I believe spinning should be done in truly aerobatic a/c and training in light trainers should go no further than incipient spin recovery,that said its only my humble opinion.[ Im aware you dont have to teach it in the JAA syllabus]The spin in the Tomahawk is a damn site more lively than a 152 having spun both.If its your cup of tea fine, but i personally do not trust the Tomahawk spinning and count my lucky stars that im still in one piece having spun them on several occasions,but not no more,i just dont trust it having looked back at the tail and the spin recovery technique taking me near through the virtical,maybe im just getting old,but spinning in the Tommybomber i will leave to you chaps.