Spin training
Guest
Posts: n/a
Spin training
Is spinning and recovery a 100%, worth-the-extra thing to do? It's not in training syllabi (sp?) here, nor the States as I understand. Having done it early in my own training, the gap between theory and what actually happens is quite large...
Moderator
The syllabus is geared more towards recovery at the incipient stage.
A few years ago in the UK spinning was replaced by "stall/spin awareness" including two hours of flogging around 5-10 knots above the stall. Gets pretty boring, and drives home the characteristics of the approaching stall to encourage recovery sooner rather than later! I think two hours was a bit excessive, but have included this exercise in our ops manual.
If this awareness is there, the chances of someone getting into a spin are very slim. How often do you fly with the nose up in the air and full rudder, after all. It would only be likely to happen as the last stage of an already bad situation, such as flying into IMC and getting disorientated, or perhaps under the stress of a forced landing that's not going so well. These are both things that are dealt with adequately in other parts of the syllabus.
The only people I've known who have got into a spin "accidentally" were the types who think things like a low pass and pull up in a small training aircraft was clever. Sadly, some of them learnt this kind of stupidity from equally "clever" yahoo flying instructors. More sadly not all of these people have lived to tell the tale.
Not all schools have aircraft that are allowed to be intentionally put into a spin. We cross-hire a 152 aerobat for anyone who wants to do it, and it is taught as part of an aerobatic sequence.
Many of us crusty old instructors who have been around for a while, and don't have the stomach for aerobatics, happily delegate spinning to others!!!
------------------
A few years ago in the UK spinning was replaced by "stall/spin awareness" including two hours of flogging around 5-10 knots above the stall. Gets pretty boring, and drives home the characteristics of the approaching stall to encourage recovery sooner rather than later! I think two hours was a bit excessive, but have included this exercise in our ops manual.
If this awareness is there, the chances of someone getting into a spin are very slim. How often do you fly with the nose up in the air and full rudder, after all. It would only be likely to happen as the last stage of an already bad situation, such as flying into IMC and getting disorientated, or perhaps under the stress of a forced landing that's not going so well. These are both things that are dealt with adequately in other parts of the syllabus.
The only people I've known who have got into a spin "accidentally" were the types who think things like a low pass and pull up in a small training aircraft was clever. Sadly, some of them learnt this kind of stupidity from equally "clever" yahoo flying instructors. More sadly not all of these people have lived to tell the tale.
Not all schools have aircraft that are allowed to be intentionally put into a spin. We cross-hire a 152 aerobat for anyone who wants to do it, and it is taught as part of an aerobatic sequence.
Many of us crusty old instructors who have been around for a while, and don't have the stomach for aerobatics, happily delegate spinning to others!!!
------------------
Guest
Posts: n/a
OK, cards on the table, I'm not an instructor - I'm a lowish (300hr) PPL, but this issue worries me. I trained in the 70's when full spin recoveries were taught, but have recently revalidated after a long lay-off, and was surprised to find that full spins are now off the UK syllabus.
I accept that unintentional spins are rare, but they do happen, and are often fatal. Most of us would probably agree that one's first spin is a fairly startling experience. A PPL entering an accidental spin at a low, but recoverable, altitude must have the presence of mind to make the correct control inputs immediately. If the spin is also the first full spin they have ever experienced, what are the chances of them (i) recognising what is going on and (ii) remembering what Trevor Thom said they should do about it in time to save the day? Not good I think. For what its worth, I would like to see full spin recovery back on the PPL syllabus.
I accept that unintentional spins are rare, but they do happen, and are often fatal. Most of us would probably agree that one's first spin is a fairly startling experience. A PPL entering an accidental spin at a low, but recoverable, altitude must have the presence of mind to make the correct control inputs immediately. If the spin is also the first full spin they have ever experienced, what are the chances of them (i) recognising what is going on and (ii) remembering what Trevor Thom said they should do about it in time to save the day? Not good I think. For what its worth, I would like to see full spin recovery back on the PPL syllabus.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hello, I am a new beginner to flying with a little over 40 hours. I have recently heard that they will take out spin training in the US because it is unnecessary. Is that true?? Even though a person would not easily put an aircraft into spin, sometimes you can never tell the situation, like wx and aircraft problems. Please elaborate more as I would like to get a full understanding. Thank you very much.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Spinning was probably removed from the syllabus due to a fear of liability claims. If you practise it and get it wrong it could be claimed as unnecessary training.
The subject has been debated endlessly by the panel of examiners with opposing views. Statistically most of the spin accidents occur at an altitude where recovery action would probably not save the day. Maybe the SSA which isn't really 2 hours at VSO +5-10 (it covers two full exercises with clean stalling, stalling with power and flap and about 10 minutes exploring low speed flight)should prevent the spin accidents that do occur.
Under JAR-FCL it is only mandatory on the FI course, there is no longer a requirement on commercial pilot courses.
The subject has been debated endlessly by the panel of examiners with opposing views. Statistically most of the spin accidents occur at an altitude where recovery action would probably not save the day. Maybe the SSA which isn't really 2 hours at VSO +5-10 (it covers two full exercises with clean stalling, stalling with power and flap and about 10 minutes exploring low speed flight)should prevent the spin accidents that do occur.
Under JAR-FCL it is only mandatory on the FI course, there is no longer a requirement on commercial pilot courses.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I am currently half way through my instuctors course so I'm sure my opinion may change in the next few months (if i get a job!!).
I do remember when I did my PPL though, I asked to do a spin. If I'd stayed with just a PPL could I expect to recover a few years later with just one hour. Don't know, BUT it did make me think " I don't wanna be doing THAT without an instructor present". Is that not part of the point?
Hoping to join the ranks soon.....
Wheelon-Wheeloff.
I do remember when I did my PPL though, I asked to do a spin. If I'd stayed with just a PPL could I expect to recover a few years later with just one hour. Don't know, BUT it did make me think " I don't wanna be doing THAT without an instructor present". Is that not part of the point?
Hoping to join the ranks soon.....
Wheelon-Wheeloff.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well I think every instructor ought to practice fully developed spin recovery at least once a quarter. I hadn't done one for about 8 months when the other day, demo'ing a full flap partial power stall to a PPL the aircraft snapped to the left and entered a spin. Totally bit my backside.
The old Bulldog spin recovery training stepped in (unbidden) and I lost 1500' and got just to the very top end of the white arc before getting the nose above the horizon and raising the flaps.
It does happen and it is scary and it can kill you. There is no real use in doing a few spins in a C152 three years ago and then being confronted with a spin in an aircraft with not ideal characteristics with no warning.
I think perhaps the average PPL does not need to learn to exit the spin but I think every instructor should by regulation have to keep current. And in different aircraft as well.
WWW
[This message has been edited by Wee Weasley Welshman (edited 03 February 2000).]
The old Bulldog spin recovery training stepped in (unbidden) and I lost 1500' and got just to the very top end of the white arc before getting the nose above the horizon and raising the flaps.
It does happen and it is scary and it can kill you. There is no real use in doing a few spins in a C152 three years ago and then being confronted with a spin in an aircraft with not ideal characteristics with no warning.
I think perhaps the average PPL does not need to learn to exit the spin but I think every instructor should by regulation have to keep current. And in different aircraft as well.
WWW
[This message has been edited by Wee Weasley Welshman (edited 03 February 2000).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'm a min-exp Grade 3 from Oz, with basic Aerobatics in a C150SP (loops, A-rolls, Stall turns etc.).
From doing the aero's and the spinning I believe that I "know" more about how the aeroplane flies, and most importantly, about what it feels like to be in a totally unusual attitude.
I agree with WWW that it is best to keep current, but at least having seen what it looks like you know what to expect.
WWW's anecdote was an excellent example of why spin training is valuable. An experienced pilot, familiar with spins, lost 1500ft recovering from a spin. From the height lost, I'd say it was a 1-2 turn spin, probably 10secs or so? What would happen to a pilot who hadn't done any spinning? Would they have time to identify what was happening, let alone correct for it?
All up, I think that you become a better, *safer* pilot for doing spinning etc., so from my perspective it definately is worth the extra hour or so.
--------
Grade 3
From doing the aero's and the spinning I believe that I "know" more about how the aeroplane flies, and most importantly, about what it feels like to be in a totally unusual attitude.
I agree with WWW that it is best to keep current, but at least having seen what it looks like you know what to expect.
WWW's anecdote was an excellent example of why spin training is valuable. An experienced pilot, familiar with spins, lost 1500ft recovering from a spin. From the height lost, I'd say it was a 1-2 turn spin, probably 10secs or so? What would happen to a pilot who hadn't done any spinning? Would they have time to identify what was happening, let alone correct for it?
All up, I think that you become a better, *safer* pilot for doing spinning etc., so from my perspective it definately is worth the extra hour or so.
--------
Grade 3
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'm yet to spin unintentionally, but the reason I posted initially was thinking of the potential for what happened to WWW and grade_3. It's all well and good to recognise the symptoms - a basic stalling awareness should keep you away from autorotation territory - but in some aircraft, it can happen fast.
Guest
Posts: n/a
WWW argued that instructors need to stay current on spin recovery, but that it is probably not necessary for PPLs to learn this skill. He experienced an inadvertant spin during a full-flap partial-power stall demonstration and managed to recover. A student pilot or PPL might legitimately practice the same manoeuvre solo, and could wind up in the same situation - without spin training they will probably not survive. Lets have spin recovery training for all + encouragement from clubs to qualified PPLs to practice this (certainly no ban on solo spinning!) + a full spin recovery as part of the 1 hour dual per 24 months required under JAR.
The reason spinning was initially seen as such a problem was because in the (very) early days many turns were made with rudder. In fact the banked turn was seen as dangerous. Attempting to turn with a heap of rudder meant that spinning was much more common, as as the recovery wasn't understood, ended in the death of many pioneers. So spinning started with a bad rap, and once the recovery was understood, it was a manadtory thing to learn.
Now until the '50, almost all machines used in civil training were ex-military (Tiger Moths, Chippies etc) so the spin training continued. Also many aircraft needed quite a bit of rudder for turns, as differential and frise ailerons weren't common and the aircraft suffered from quite a bit of adverse yaw.
Enter the 60s. Piper and Cessna wanted to build their new types, but certifying them for spinning would have been very expensive, so the FAA allowed them to be certified with recovery from the incipient spin only, and spinning was placarded as not approved. Better design allowed for very little adverse yaw, and ailerons that are fully effective throughout the stall, meaning that they have very docile handling. It is almost impossible to inadvertently spin a modern civil training aircraft.
As these types became common, schools were faced with a fleet in which spinning was prohibited, and retaining an aerobatic machine purely for spin training is very expensive. This, coupled with the docile handling of the modern machine, is why spin training was dropped from the sylabus - and I think the stats show that actual spin accidents pretty rare.
I have no objection to PPLs never being in a spin - but as an (ex) aerobatic instructor I have to agree that it helps in understanding and confidence.
Now until the '50, almost all machines used in civil training were ex-military (Tiger Moths, Chippies etc) so the spin training continued. Also many aircraft needed quite a bit of rudder for turns, as differential and frise ailerons weren't common and the aircraft suffered from quite a bit of adverse yaw.
Enter the 60s. Piper and Cessna wanted to build their new types, but certifying them for spinning would have been very expensive, so the FAA allowed them to be certified with recovery from the incipient spin only, and spinning was placarded as not approved. Better design allowed for very little adverse yaw, and ailerons that are fully effective throughout the stall, meaning that they have very docile handling. It is almost impossible to inadvertently spin a modern civil training aircraft.
As these types became common, schools were faced with a fleet in which spinning was prohibited, and retaining an aerobatic machine purely for spin training is very expensive. This, coupled with the docile handling of the modern machine, is why spin training was dropped from the sylabus - and I think the stats show that actual spin accidents pretty rare.
I have no objection to PPLs never being in a spin - but as an (ex) aerobatic instructor I have to agree that it helps in understanding and confidence.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I used to think that showing a spin or two and recovery to a student was a smart thing to do, showed that the pilot could still be in control and master of the machine UNTIL the day it took me 3000'+ to recover and that was from my initial planned recovery height. 600' AGL I finally got control, now that adrenaline rush is greater than any aero sequence, I can tell you.
No, I wasn't gung ho, I was both aero certified and current (very) but perhaps the Cessna Aerobat was tired and no longer up to the job.
My lesson learnt..., I now only teach aero's in a proper aerobatic aircraft leaving the C150 aerobat for basic training and leave the learning of aero's (including spins) to those who already have a licence and want the aero endorsement.
I consider that actually showing a Private Pilot student how to recover from a spin is like actually practicing ditching in the water. Kinda pointless really.
Another point, in several years of instructing I've never had a student put me into an inadvertent spin nor have I ever entered one myself.
Chief Flying Instructor's post really hits the nail on the head and my two quids worth,... teach how not to get into the situation rather than the solution.
This subject has been a post before but it is good to see it come up again. It is a very important and petinent subject for all those who instruct.
No, I wasn't gung ho, I was both aero certified and current (very) but perhaps the Cessna Aerobat was tired and no longer up to the job.
My lesson learnt..., I now only teach aero's in a proper aerobatic aircraft leaving the C150 aerobat for basic training and leave the learning of aero's (including spins) to those who already have a licence and want the aero endorsement.
I consider that actually showing a Private Pilot student how to recover from a spin is like actually practicing ditching in the water. Kinda pointless really.
Another point, in several years of instructing I've never had a student put me into an inadvertent spin nor have I ever entered one myself.
Chief Flying Instructor's post really hits the nail on the head and my two quids worth,... teach how not to get into the situation rather than the solution.
This subject has been a post before but it is good to see it come up again. It is a very important and petinent subject for all those who instruct.
Guest
Posts: n/a
WWW. If an aircraft snapped and spun (without obvious ham-fisted pilot input to cause it)then it may have an airworthiness defect which should be recorded. While it is is difficult to get (say) a Cessna 150 to spin inadvertently, it is quite possible that an inmproperly rigged wing can cause a very nasty wing drop at the stall - which if mis-handled can develop into a spin.
I know, because it happened to me. From an innocuous clean stall at idle, I had a 150 snap hard left with no warning. Lost 500 ft during recovery. There was no mention of this in the aircraft tech log, yet the flying school staff were well aware of the defect. They all felt it was marvellous to have an aircraft that gave them a bit of a thrill - ignoring the fact that it was not a design characteristic of the type.
It was worse with partial power and full flap. I wrote up the defect in the maintenance release, which caused a bitter complaint from the owner who was an aircraft maintenance engineer! Investigation revealed that the rigging was way out of tolerance. The defect was rectified and the aircraft subsequently stalled normally.
Cessnas and their like are designed to have safe stalling characteristics and the max wing drop permitted during certification flight tests is 15 deg. Few pilots will write up a bad wing drop as a defect - many feel it would be considered a trifle wimpish. But for an inexperienced student inadvertently stalling during an overbanked turn at low altitude, that wing drop could be fatal - especially if he lacked spin recovery skills.
If an individual aircraft is known for a significant wing drop at point of stall, then it is un-airworthy, and should be defected. Your action may save a life.
In view of the dodgy condition of many GA aircraft such as that described above, I am convinced that spin recovery training should be mandatory before first solo.
I know, because it happened to me. From an innocuous clean stall at idle, I had a 150 snap hard left with no warning. Lost 500 ft during recovery. There was no mention of this in the aircraft tech log, yet the flying school staff were well aware of the defect. They all felt it was marvellous to have an aircraft that gave them a bit of a thrill - ignoring the fact that it was not a design characteristic of the type.
It was worse with partial power and full flap. I wrote up the defect in the maintenance release, which caused a bitter complaint from the owner who was an aircraft maintenance engineer! Investigation revealed that the rigging was way out of tolerance. The defect was rectified and the aircraft subsequently stalled normally.
Cessnas and their like are designed to have safe stalling characteristics and the max wing drop permitted during certification flight tests is 15 deg. Few pilots will write up a bad wing drop as a defect - many feel it would be considered a trifle wimpish. But for an inexperienced student inadvertently stalling during an overbanked turn at low altitude, that wing drop could be fatal - especially if he lacked spin recovery skills.
If an individual aircraft is known for a significant wing drop at point of stall, then it is un-airworthy, and should be defected. Your action may save a life.
In view of the dodgy condition of many GA aircraft such as that described above, I am convinced that spin recovery training should be mandatory before first solo.
Guest
Posts: n/a
My two cents worth:
Despite the fact that most airplanes are very docile and that the FAA has removed spintraining from the syllabus for all except instructors, I still taught my students spin recovery, my argument being it is better to have seen it and recovered from it, than not. Has this ever saved any lives, I do not know, but I wanted to make the best and safest pilots I could and felt this was part of the equation.
Despite the fact that most airplanes are very docile and that the FAA has removed spintraining from the syllabus for all except instructors, I still taught my students spin recovery, my argument being it is better to have seen it and recovered from it, than not. Has this ever saved any lives, I do not know, but I wanted to make the best and safest pilots I could and felt this was part of the equation.
Glasgow's Gallus Gigolo .... PPRuNeing is like making love to a beautiful woman ... I take hours.
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I always offered students the option to go spinning, as part of their stall/spin awareness training. Almost all accepted, and learned from it.
Incidentally, a C150 or C152 will flick inverted from a quite benign-looking stall entry. Level turn, no more than 20 degrees of bank, 20 degrees of flap, 1500 RPM, and it will give a little light buffet, a few squeaks from the stall warner, then flick. It varies from a/c to a/c- some will only go in one direction, the other way it flicks to a turn in the opposite direction. Of course, that could have been coz' the instructor was too fat.....
Incidentally, a C150 or C152 will flick inverted from a quite benign-looking stall entry. Level turn, no more than 20 degrees of bank, 20 degrees of flap, 1500 RPM, and it will give a little light buffet, a few squeaks from the stall warner, then flick. It varies from a/c to a/c- some will only go in one direction, the other way it flicks to a turn in the opposite direction. Of course, that could have been coz' the instructor was too fat.....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Looks like WWW had a traumahawk-type of moment.
I think that you'd end up killing more pilots by re-introducing mandatory spin training in addition to those killed low and slow. You're never 100% certain that an aircraft is going to come out of a spin. If a spin were mandatory for PPL courses, they'd soon lose currency anyway. I'd rather that continuation SSA training were mandatory, as per the flight with an instructor which most PPL's will have to do to revalidate their JAR rating. Such a pity the CAA have overplayed the flight in their recent AIC and that certain GA magazines have over-reacted.....
------------------
0 to 2000ft in 10 minutes
I think that you'd end up killing more pilots by re-introducing mandatory spin training in addition to those killed low and slow. You're never 100% certain that an aircraft is going to come out of a spin. If a spin were mandatory for PPL courses, they'd soon lose currency anyway. I'd rather that continuation SSA training were mandatory, as per the flight with an instructor which most PPL's will have to do to revalidate their JAR rating. Such a pity the CAA have overplayed the flight in their recent AIC and that certain GA magazines have over-reacted.....
------------------
0 to 2000ft in 10 minutes
Guest
Posts: n/a
Knowledge dispells fear. Personally , I feel that everyone learning to fly should experience a spin and recovery at least once. However, not all aircraft can be relied upon to recover (I have several friends who can thank parachutes for their safe spin recoveries)and escape systems are costly. Hence teaching people how to avoid the spin is probably more cost effective in the long run.
Any pilot whose aircraft is capable of aerobatics must learn how to recover from a spin before venturing off on his own. Even the most benign manoeuvre can jump up and bite you in the ass. I know of several student pilots who have departed controlled flight from simple manoeuvres such as the Cuban 8 or the 1/2 Horizontal 8. The spin recovery got them out of the spin which they were able to recognize.
I have taught spinning for some time now and have even taught inverted spinning in aircraft capable of it. I am firmly of the opinion that many of the past light aircraft crashes due to the departure from controlled flight could have possibly been avoided had the pilot recognized the spin and recovered from it.
Any pilot whose aircraft is capable of aerobatics must learn how to recover from a spin before venturing off on his own. Even the most benign manoeuvre can jump up and bite you in the ass. I know of several student pilots who have departed controlled flight from simple manoeuvres such as the Cuban 8 or the 1/2 Horizontal 8. The spin recovery got them out of the spin which they were able to recognize.
I have taught spinning for some time now and have even taught inverted spinning in aircraft capable of it. I am firmly of the opinion that many of the past light aircraft crashes due to the departure from controlled flight could have possibly been avoided had the pilot recognized the spin and recovered from it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'm with Hudson and CLAD. Modern light aircraft are designed to be spin resistant, FAR 23 or something applies. All of the light singles that I have flown have had to be grossly mis handled to spin. One 152 I flew flat out refused to spin to the right from a S&L stall. A modern light aircraft that spins without serious provocation is, in my opinion, unserviceable.
I'm not sure that the argument about recognising a spin and therefore being able to recover is justified. I have never heard of a pilot in recent times who has died in a spinning accident from a recoverable height. I have however heard of plenty of spin endorsed pilots who have frightened themselves silly in aeroplanes that have refused to recover (who knows why) until a huge amount of height had been lost.
As far as I can remember, all the spin and crash accidents I have heard of have been related to trying to turn back to the field following engine failure after take off and people playing silly buggers at low level. In both of these cases, spin trained or not, there would have been no recovery, better to stress the airmanship aspects involved with both of these activities.
To sum up. I do not believe that spin training is necessary if you plan to fly modern GA aircraft. However, if you plan to do aerobatics or get checked out in something a little more antique, then you'd be silly not to. I have no problem with demonstrating or teaching spinning to anyone who is interested, but the first few spins that people do or see in an aircraft would have to be the most scary and disorientating thing. Better to teach good recognition of the symptoms of the approaching stall and recovery and try to ensure that the student never even gets close to an inadvertant spin.
I'm not sure that the argument about recognising a spin and therefore being able to recover is justified. I have never heard of a pilot in recent times who has died in a spinning accident from a recoverable height. I have however heard of plenty of spin endorsed pilots who have frightened themselves silly in aeroplanes that have refused to recover (who knows why) until a huge amount of height had been lost.
As far as I can remember, all the spin and crash accidents I have heard of have been related to trying to turn back to the field following engine failure after take off and people playing silly buggers at low level. In both of these cases, spin trained or not, there would have been no recovery, better to stress the airmanship aspects involved with both of these activities.
To sum up. I do not believe that spin training is necessary if you plan to fly modern GA aircraft. However, if you plan to do aerobatics or get checked out in something a little more antique, then you'd be silly not to. I have no problem with demonstrating or teaching spinning to anyone who is interested, but the first few spins that people do or see in an aircraft would have to be the most scary and disorientating thing. Better to teach good recognition of the symptoms of the approaching stall and recovery and try to ensure that the student never even gets close to an inadvertant spin.