Everyone should be taught how to do spins and spin recovery.

MauleSkinner said:
More than likely the incorrect aileron use was trying to correct incorrect rudder use.
Click to expand...

Correct - was just noting that insufficient right rudder during a power on stall resulting in a left wing drop (followed by an incorrect attempt to pick it up with right aileron) doesn't necessarily produce a spin entry - just a wing drop.
 
RoscoeT said:
Correct - was just noting that insufficient right rudder during a power on stall resulting in a left wing drop (followed by an incorrect attempt to pick it up with right aileron) doesn't necessarily produce a spin entry - just a wing drop.
Click to expand...
Except he said right wing drop and left aileron.
 
Salty said:
Except he said right wing drop and left aileron.
Click to expand...

I described the typical scenario. It's even harder to spin with left aileron in this scenario. To drop the right wing requires right rudder...and to get a true spin entry, you have to fully deflect the right rudder and hold it. Anything less than that is just a wing drop. If you're super ham-footed, it is possible of course. It's just harder to spin these things than folks who have never done spins think. Usually it's just a wing drop.
 
I am not sure if we will be doing spins for PPL training.
I would like to try akro-light after I get my PPL. I mean just try a few lessons.

But I did wonder about the conditions, etc. that might be a factor. I don't know, I'm just guessing.
I fly a C172 SP. I Believe if I make sure with W&B (that is the diff between category, right?) that it is utility then here is where I get unsure. Positive G's then can be up to 4.4G. But negative notes (both normal and utility)says something like "not approved for inverted maneuvers".

I can't figure out if a spin is an inverted maneuver. It's not upside down exactly, but in some ways I could think it was some kind of inversion regarding AOA or relative wind? I just don't know. So how is it seem, if an airplane has a utility category does that automatically means spins allowed?

Also, are spins possibly a danger for some instruments? A plane outfitted with IFR equipment, or just gyros ?

Why do they call it utility? I think of it as allowed to do more demanding maneuvers but the word usually means something like "useful" like a utility vehicle that can haul a lot?
 
LongRoadBob said:
I can't figure out if a spin is an inverted maneuver. It's not upside down exactly, but in some ways I could think it was some kind of inversion regarding AOA or relative wind?
Click to expand...

Inverted or upright is irrelevant. I think you're asking about positive vs. negative G. The 172 is not designed for negative G aerobatic maneuvers, but a normal spin is a totally positive G maneuver even if you momentarily pass through an inverted attitude after a half turn of the initial spin entry. You can do negative G inverted spins, but that requires first stalling by pushing the yoke forward rather than backward. Not something you're gonna be doing in a 172.
 
RoscoeT said:
Inverted or upright is irrelevant. I think you're asking about positive vs. negative G. The 172 is not designed for negative G aerobatic maneuvers, but a normal spin is a totally positive G maneuver even if you momentarily pass through an inverted attitude after a half turn of the initial spin entry. You can do negative G inverted spins, but that requires first stalling by pushing the yoke forward rather than backward. Not something you're gonna be doing in a 172.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the help and info. What about the instruments? Since it is not primarily a negative g load not a problem? No danger to gyro or IFR Instruments?
 
It is a disappointing trend that so many pilots wish to transform the aircraft into essentially a flying car that happens to have a vertical component to its travel.

Aircraft, regardless of how they're designed or constructed, are by definition all attitude vehicles. They don't know which way is up or down -- they only know forces that they are experiencing or that are active upon them, and those forces are often independent of attitude relative the horizon.

Pilots should know them and be prepared to fly them as such, as unfortunately the airplane doesn't know or understand (or actually be limited to) the human desire to limit their performance to 30 degrees of bank relative to the horizon.

Go get spin training. Go get acro training. Even if you are a sport pilot or PPL. Your life may depend on the knowledge and experience.
 
I admit I did not read the entire thread, but....

I can only speak for a few airplanes.. basically the small cessnas.
That said, it was HARD to put one of these airplanes into a spin. Recovery was automatic, although there is a procedure.

The point is do not train how to enter a spin. If there is any spin training it should be the recovery. That said, by that time it’s likely too late. Nobody spins during cruise.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Let’s see...there was the Bonanza back in ‘91 or so that spun out of Icing in cruise...there was a Baron that very possibly did so over Illinois...

A few more than “nobody”.
Click to expand...
You had one that was iced and one that possibly spun.
Anymore stellar examples?
 
MauleSkinner said:
Doesn’t matter...”nobody” is a false statement.
Click to expand...
Whatever.... :rolleyes:
One example from 28 years ago, and that’s because he fell out of the sky because he was iced up.
This thread is about learning spin recoveries. In his case recovery would likely not have been possible.
 
I completely agree with the title of the original post. Every pilot should demonstrate spin entry and recovery prior to earning any certificate.

This ACS nonsense with "impending stall indications" is cr4p. If everyone learned and became proficient at full stall, minimum speed landings and could master their touchdown energy, transitioning to a conventional gear (tailwheel) airplane would be trivial. It seems the average Joe pilot lands way too fast and is afraid of getting anywhere near stall speed...
 
Last edited:
Kritchlow said:
Whatever.... :rolleyes:
One example from 28 years ago, and that’s because he fell out of the sky because he was iced up.
This thread is about learning spin recoveries. In his case recovery would likely not have been possible.
Click to expand...
He recovered from the first one.
 
IK04 said:
This ACS nonsense with "impending stall indications" is cr4p. I everyone learned and became proficient at full stall, minimum speed landings and could master their touchdown energy, transitioning to a conventional gear (tailwheel) airplane would be trivial. It seems the average Joe pilot lands way too fast and is afraid of getting anywhere near stall speed...
Click to expand...
What's wrong with identifying impending stall indications? Ignoring them completely seems like a pretty poor recipe for stall avoidance.

The Private Pilot ACS still requires full stalls.
 
IK04 said:
It seems the average Joe pilot lands way too fast and is afraid of getting anywhere near stall speed...
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with this assessment I feel I am over cautious about stall speed in the pattern and have found my approach speed getting rounded up. I'm not sure spin training would solve that. More slow flight practice and better understanding of the envelope at slow flight would help. I find that constant articles about stall/spins in the pattern make me scratch my head and the effect is that I've found myself adding 5 knots - which gets rounded up to 10 with a crosswind, etc. and carrying too much speed on final. With a long runway and just flying a warrior the net effect is just a long float. But it's sloppy airmanship. This is something I intend to make a more focused effort on this weekend...if the weather complies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Tommar98 said:
I don't disagree with this assessment I feel I am over cautious about stall speed in the pattern and have found my approach speed getting rounded up. I'm not sure spin training would solve that. More slow flight practice and better understanding of the envelope at slow flight would help. I find that constant articles about stall/spins in the pattern make me scratch my head and the effect is that I've found myself adding 5 knots - which gets rounded up to 10 with a crosswind, etc. and carrying too much speed on final. With a long runway and just flying a warrior the net effect is just a long float. But it's sloppy airmanship. This is something I intend to make a more focused effort on this weekend...if the weather complies.
Click to expand...

This post perfectly sums up what you can gain from spin training. It's not about trying to enable a pilot to make some sort of imaginary heroic recovery from a spin at 500'. It's about awareness, skill, experience, knowledge, comfort level, confidence, etc- you know, silly stuff.....LIKE BECOMING A BETTER PILOT.
 
RoscoeT said:
This post perfectly sums up what you can gain from spin training. It's not about trying to enable a pilot to make some sort of imaginary heroic recovery from a spin at 500'. It's about awareness, skill, experience, knowledge, comfort level, confidence, etc- you know, silly stuff.....LIKE BECOMING A BETTER PILOT.
Click to expand...
I think it is negative training. It is HARD to induce a spin in most GA aircraft. I think it gives a false sense of security.
As an instructor back in the early 90’s I would give my students the option of doing spins. It seemed counter intuitive to teach them how to get into a spin. It’s unatural to do it.
 
Kritchlow said:
I think it is negative training. It is HARD to induce a spin in most GA aircraft. I think it gives a false sense of security.
As an instructor back in the early 90’s I would give my students the option of doing spins. It seemed counter intuitive to teach them how to get into a spin. It’s unatural to do it.
Click to expand...

Wow, NEGATIVE training. That is truly a brand new viewpoint that I've never seen espoused by anyone before. I fail to understand how gaining more practical as well as academic knowledge of any aspect of flying is NEGATIVE. You seem to be missing the point. The point is not to teach pilots how to do deliberate spins for the sake of getting your jollies doing spins. It's to show them the various conditions and requirements for allowing this to happen. It's about experience and awareness. Why do you think so many pilots carry extra speed on final, and skid the base to final turn? They are uncomfortable and unfamiliar with the edges of the envelope because they fear the unknown and don't know what lurks around the corner. In an effort to avoid this, they are making things worse for themselves and displaying lack of skill as a pilot. I guess you think full stall training is negative too. :rolleyes: Spins are just a possible development of a stall.
 
RoscoeT said:
Wow, NEGATIVE training. That is truly a brand new viewpoint that I've never seen espoused by anyone before. I fail to understand how gaining more practical as well as academic knowledge of any aspect of flying is NEGATIVE. You seem to be missing the point. The point is not to teach pilots how to do deliberate spins for the sake of getting your jollies doing spins. It's to show them the various conditions and requirements for allowing this to happen. It's about experience and awareness. Why do you think so many pilots carry extra speed on final, and skid the base to final turn? They are uncomfortable and unfamiliar with the edges of the envelope because they fear the unknown and don't know what lurks around the corner. In an effort to avoid this, they are making things worse for themselves and displaying lack of skill as a pilot. I guess you think full stall training is negative too. :rolleyes: Spins are just a possible development of a stall.
Click to expand...
??? Spin training on the base to final turn is useless.
Just teach them proper pattern procedures, including speed & rudder coordination, will prevent them from a spin they cannot recover from.

Negative training is a huge for no-no for professional pilots.
 
Kritchlow said:
??? Spin training on the base to final turn is useless.
Just teach them proper pattern procedures, including speed & rudder coordination, will prevent them from a spin they cannot recover from.

Negative training is a huge for no-no for professional pilots.
Click to expand...

Hard to have a worthwhile discussion if you're not reading and addressing what's actually been written.

But it is funny how many US military and civvie carriers contract with organizations/individuals to provide their pilots with this "negative" spin and upset training. I guess you prefer the Asiana training model where a pilot's command over their aircraft exists within the narrowest possible slice of the envelope. LOL
 
RoscoeT said:
Hard to have a worthwhile discussion if you're not reading and addressing what's actually been written.

But it is funny how many US military and civvie carriers contract with organizations/individuals to provide their pilots with this "negative" spin and upset training. I guess you prefer the Asiana training model where a pilot's command over their aircraft exists within the narrowest possible slice of the envelope. LOL
Click to expand...
Huh??? What does Asiana training have anything to with spins??

I assume you are a CFI and can say your students can recover from a base to final spin??

Perhaps I’m confused. Wouldn’t be the first time.
 
Kritchlow said:
I assume you are a CFI and can say your students can recover from a base to final spin??

Perhaps I’m confused. Wouldn’t be the first time.
Click to expand...

Yes you are confused if you keep thinking this is about being a base to final hero.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top