Spin Training Poll

[dmccormack]

Here's a poll on spin training.

Please share your thoughts on your experience, or why you haven't yet!

 

[KennyFlys]

I did it. Some silly thing required to become a CFI.

Tis only the beginning of what I want to accomplish in training.

 

[dmccormack]

I did it. Some silly thing required to become a CFI.

Tis only the beginning of what I want to accomplish in training.

I did my spin training with an Aerobatics instructor -- I can't say I was enthusiastic the first time out!

After the first couple it was exhilarating. We used a C172E (nearly impossible to spin to the right without a LOT of energy).

Before long I could pick a point and recover to that point on heading -- lots of fun!

The Cross controlled stall worked well -- from banking to inverted in no time.

 

[snowbird]

Spin training is required for the private here in Canada. Good fun after you get used to it. I didn't even get sick though I did look a little pale after a session with six practice spins in a Cherokee.

 

[dmccormack]

Spin training is required for the private here in Canada. Good fun after you get used to it. I didn't even get sick though I did look a little pale after a session with six practice spins in a Cherokee.

Off topic --- We saw the Snowbirds perform last Saturday at the Pittsburgh Air Show. The last time I saw them was in the 70s in Toronto (Probably for Canada Day).

After the F-22 Raptor, F/A-18s, etc, World Wide Wrestling Display of brute power, the Snowbirds were a perfectly executed, graceful ballet.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Spinning, and recovering from a spin (in an appropriately certificated and loaded aircraft, of course), should be as natural as doing a steep turn.

 

[KennyFlys]

Spinning, and recovering from a spin (in an appropriately certificated and loaded aircraft, of course), should be as natural as doing a steep turn.

It was... after the first few.

A Super Decathlon helped. That was a fun plane. On the first flight, I thought all was well and he kept asking me if I was doing ok as we did spins and a few other maneuvers such as what happens to get you into an inverted spin or flat spin. Then, the bottom fell out and it's "Oooooook, time to hit the deck!". Someday, we'll have a bird like it!

Or, Diana.... wanna move to Texas?

 

[dmccormack]

A Super Decathlon helped. That was a fun plane. On the first flight, I thought all was well and he kept asking me if I was doing ok as we did spins and a few other maneuvers such as what happens to get you into an inverted spin or flat spin. Then, the bottom fell out and it's "Oooooook, time to hit the deck!". Someday, we'll have a bird like it!

Larry (My CFI for the CFI prep) has a Decathlon, but it's in various stages of disassembly.



I keep trying to get him to put it back together and offer Upset Recovery training...

 

[Ted]

My spin training:

I put the airplane into a spin (by accident during a takeoff stall) and started recovery, without my instructor's assistance. Then I said "HELP!" and he recovered it and said "You were doing the right thing, just not enough."

I want to do more, and intend on doing more, but at least I feel if I got into it inadvertently, I know what I need to do to get out of it.

 

[vontresc]

Pretty much did the same thing as Ted. On my 172 checkout (got my pricate in a cherokee 140) during a power on stall the CFI let me get uncoordinated, and she broke quite nicely to the left. Managed to recover quickly, but scared the ever lovin' snot out of me when it did. After talking about it briefly we did a few more on purpose, and I felt much more comfortable with the recovery, and reinforced the need to stay coordinated.

Pete

 

[Teller1900]

I did the usual spins in a 172N during my CFI training. Turns out, with a 220lb student and a 250lb instructor, closing the door on a Skyhawk is challenging; getting it to spin - nearly impossible. It took six tries to coax the thing into a spin, and even then it was so docile I barely had to do anything to recover. Kind of anti-climactic, really.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

You're missing a "never done a spin, but would love to get that training" choice...

That'd be my selection.

 

[poadeleted20]

The FAA has statistics to support their assertion that spin avoidance training is far more important than spin recovery training because most spins occur at altitudes too low to recover even if you know how and do it right. Ain't sayin' they're right or wrong, just sayin' what they believe, which goes to why the regs say what they do.

 

[vontresc]

Hmm matt, I didn't know the 172 was approved for spins in NORMAL category GG/Wight limits

 

[RMCN172RG]

I don't agree with the wording but I have not yet been in a spinning Airplane.

The main reason is until I get the commercial done and go for the CFI no need to do it.

172RG is not certified for it so I can't do it in my airplane with an instructor.

I will probably get there in the next year though.

 

[dmccormack]

The FAA has statistics to support their assertion that spin avoidance training is far more important than spin recovery training because most spins occur at altitudes too low to recover even if you know how and do it right. Ain't sayin' they're right or wrong, just sayin' what they believe, which goes to why the regs say what they do.

Ron,

I may be overstating the case, but IMHO Rich Stowell has been doing good work proving AOPA and FAA wrong on this one....

 

[dmccormack]

My spin training:

I put the airplane into a spin (by accident during a takeoff stall) and started recovery, without my instructor's assistance. Then I said "HELP!" and he recovered it and said "You were doing the right thing, just not enough."

I want to do more, and intend on doing more, but at least I feel if I got into it inadvertently, I know what I need to do to get out of it.

I think one of the real values of spin training (beyond one to the right and one to the left) is making it as ordinary as Steep Turns (as previously mentioned).

I think recurrent and at least some extensive spin training may even be of some use -- it keeps you aware of what may happen in which flight regime, and takes away the white-knuckle terror that can cause a freeze-up on the controls.

Keep in mind, a Normal category airplane doesn't give you much time to recover, so you need to be quick on it and don't have lots' of time to think about PARE:

AC 61-67C: Chapter 4: Airworthiness Standards
400. Operating Limitations.

a. Normal Category. Normal category airplanes are not approved for the performance of acrobatic maneuvers, including spins, and are placarded against intentional spins. However, to provide a margin of safety when recovery from a stall is delayed, normal category airplanes are tested during certification and must be able to recover from a one turn spin or a 3-second spin, whichever takes longer, in not more than one additional turn with the controls used in the manner normally used for recovery or demonstrate the airplanes resistance to spins…


NOTE: Since airplanes certificated in the normal category have not been tested for more than a one turn or 3-second spin, their performance characteristics beyond these limits are unknown. This is the reason they are placarded against intentional spins.

 

[TMetzinger]

Ron,

I may be overstating the case, but IMHO Rich Stowell has been doing good work proving AOPA and FAA wrong on this one....

I couldn't find any reference to Rich assembling statistics showing that the many stall/spin accidents causing fatalities would be recoverable. If you've got such a reference, I'd love to review it.

I've always understood the requirement for CFI spin proficiency is to address inadvertent spins while performing airwork at an altitude where a spin would be recoverable. I didn't think it was intended to address the stall/spin accidents down low - that's still covered by stall avoidance.

Certainly the Emergency Manuever Training is a good thing to have in your bag of tricks, and I think spin experience is valuable. I'm just not convinced they'll lower the accident rate.

 

[dmccormack]

I couldn't find any reference to Rich assembling statistics showing that the many stall/spin accidents causing fatalities would be recoverable. If you've got such a reference, I'd love to review it.

I've always understood the requirement for CFI spin proficiency is to address inadvertent spins while performing airwork at an altitude where a spin would be recoverable. I didn't think it was intended to address the stall/spin accidents down low - that's still covered by stall avoidance.

Certainly the Emergency Manuever Training is a good thing to have in your bag of tricks, and I think spin experience is valuable. I'm just not convinced they'll lower the accident rate.

Rich Stowell's site has some, and so does the Air Safety Foundation.

This is an endless debate, but I think Bill Kershner had the best phrase about basic aerobatic training (including spins, Chandelles, Lazy 8s, etc) to wit (and I paraphrase) to Get the pilot to fly the airplane, so he's no longer flying like a little old lady driving a golf cart..

 

[Ted]

...but scared the ever lovin' snot out of me when it did.

I left that part out! I sure had that, too! After that spin the rest of the lesson was pretty worthless, my instructor knew it so we headed back in and landed.

I'm not so scared of it now, though.

I think one of the real values of spin training (beyond one to the right and one to the left) is making it as ordinary as Steep Turns (as previously mentioned).

Agreed! All such maneuvers I would like to be easy and natural for me. Hence, required training!

 

[TMetzinger]

Well, I read your references, and to me they just reinforced my previous assumption - taking spin training will make you a better pilot, but will not help you if you do something stupid at low altitude. So I don't see the benefit of making spin training a required part of the pilot syllabus. I like seeing it as an optional course of study for pilots who may have an operational need for the knowledge and skill, or for general enrichment.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Well, I read your references, and to me they just reinforced my previous assumption - taking spin training will make you a better pilot, but will not help you if you do something stupid at low altitude. So I don't see the benefit of making spin training a required part of the pilot syllabus. I like seeing it as an optional course of study for pilots who may have an operational need for the knowledge and skill, or for general enrichment.

Yes, this is an old debate, but some pilots are new, so bear with me for a little rehash. There is no doubt that a classic spin scenario such as a skidding base to final turn leaves neither time nor altitude for recovery. There is also a great deal of evidence from times when and places where spin training was/is required that accidents during spin training kill more people than do inadvertent spin accidents among pilots who have been trained to recognize and avoid spins, as Ron points out.

However, I am firmly a member of the Church of Kershner, and I also hold that a pilot should know how to fly the airplane. Thoroughly and intuitively. And until you do some spins, you are falling short of that mark, IMO.

 

[dmccormack]

However, I am firmly a member of the Church of Kershner, and I also hold that a pilot should know how to fly the airplane. Thoroughly and intuitively. And until you do some spins, you are falling short of that mark, IMO.

Though, my first foray into flight training (at age 17) in my 2nd hour the CFI demonstrated incipient spins, HIGH angle of attack power on stalls ("You gotta yank the nose up to make it stall when you're going fast.."), and a slip to landing with MY door open "for more drag."

Scared the snot out of me and I didn't show up for hour 3.

20+ years later I learned to fly and told my CFI I did not want to do that stuff if I could avoid it.

He understood, explained that whatever I had done before sounded like it wasn't really required for PP flight training, and we did about an hour of power OFF stalls.

I finally figured out I wasn't going to die and started getting comfortable with the airplane.

Understanding beforehand what is going to happen, living through a good demonstration, and then repeatedly recovering on your own leads to confidence across the various flight regimes -- straight and level or inverted.

 

[SkyHog]

Spin training belongs int he Private Pilot Syllabus.

Any ground reference beyond rectangular course does not.

That's all I have to say about that.

 

[poadeleted20]

I may be overstating the case, but IMHO Rich Stowell has been doing good work proving AOPA and FAA wrong on this one....

If he can make the case, so be it, and you won't see me arguing with the FAA if they put spin recovery training back in the primary pilot certificate (Pvt/Rec/LS) requirements. However, if that happens, I guarantee there will be a great uproar in opposition to the rule from NATA and other flight school organizations because the flight schools don't have, and don't have the cash to buy, airplanes in which they can legally do spin training. For example, Warriers are not spin-approved, and as noted above, 172's have significant load limits for spinning. Anybody know if DA-20's are spin-approved?

 

[poadeleted20]

Though, my first foray into flight training (at age 17) in my 2nd hour the CFI demonstrated incipient spins, HIGH angle of attack power on stalls ("You gotta yank the nose up to make it stall when you're going fast.."), and a slip to landing with MY door open "for more drag." Scared the snot out of me and I didn't show up for hour 3.

Now you know why responsible CFI's don't dump that stuff on new students. If you're going to do it, wait until the student is really ready for it and move into it gently with much prior discussion on the ground (see "Law of Readiness" and "Law of Effect" in the AIH).

 

[dmccormack]

If he can make the case, so be it, and you won't see me arguing with the FAA if they put spin recovery training back in the primary pilot certificate (Pvt/Rec/LS) requirements. However, if that happens, I guarantee there will be a great uproar in opposition to the rule from NATA and other flight school organizations because the flight schools don't have, and don't have the cash to buy, airplanes in which they can legally do spin training. For example, Warriers are not spin-approved, and as noted above, 172's have significant load limits for spinning. Anybody know if DA-20's are spin-approved?

Aren't just about all 172s approved for spins when loaded w/n utility CG range? (usually case with 2 normal humans in front seat and somewhat less than full tank)

Cessna 150/152s used to be ubiquitous at FBOs, but maybe the new Cessna SkyCatcher (which looks like s slicker 152) will fill in that missing niche?

 

[dmccormack]

Now you know why responsible CFI's don't dump that stuff on new students. If you're going to do it, wait until the student is really ready for it and move into it gently with much prior discussion on the ground (see "Law of Readiness" and "Law of Effect" in the AIH).

Absolutely.

At the time (I was 17) it took me a while to realize it was all about him and his ego.

There's no room for that in civilian flight training.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I'm not going to get into the "should vs shouldn't" argument, but I'll outline my spin background a bit...

When I was a 16-year-old student pilot (you KNOW this paragraph isn't going to turn out well ), my instructor showed me how to do spins in a Cessna 140, and then in a Cessna 150. During my solo flight practice, I spent hours and hours doing spins. Didn't tell my instructor OR my mom. Even got lost once, because winds aloft were kind of strong that day, and blew me 50 miles from home. Foolishness at it's finest? Nope...read on.

When I was in college, we had a homebuilt aircraft. I was circling well outside the 500-ft limit from persons, vehicles, vessels, or structures, looking at something in a field. Got slow, flew through my wake, stalled, and got into an incipient spin. Fortunately, I had enough spin practice to immediately recover, "plenty" of altitude to spare. Sure, a fully-developed spin would have been unrecoverable at this altitude, but I didn't feel the need to let it fully develop prior to initiating recovery.

Ah, but it gets better. I decided I'd better familiarize myself with the spin characteristics of the airplane. I determined that spins were an authorized maneuver in the airplane. I computed a weight and balance with the desired fuel (the tank was ahead of the cockpits, and more than about 1/2 tank resulted in fuel coming out the vent and into my face during stalls, so I wanted to be 1/2 tank or less), and determined that I was within the CG envelope. Barely. The pencil mark didn't quite touch the aft limit. So off I went. 5-6000 ft, slowed it down, stalled, kicked it over (the airplane does the most asthetically pleasing spin entries, IMO), and initiated the recovery after 1/2 turn. About 1/2 turn later, apparently without even slowing the rotation, the spin reversed direction. Quick opposite rudder and then neutralizing it stopped the spin, and I recovered. Idiot that I was, I decided to try that again. And again. And again...same result each time, either direction. Landed at my uncle's airstrip, and noted a pulse rate of something in the neighborhood of 150 bpm. Just a touch stressful, apparently.

My next (first, and only, in fact) flight review, I requested that we do some serious spin training in the 152. I found a CFI who was comfortable with spins, and we had some serious ground and flight training regarding the aerodynamics of spins, spin entries, spin recoveries. We also discussed my experience with the homebuilt...I can't print his comments here, since this is a "family" board, but he was definitely right. I later did an abbreviated review/flight for CFI spin endorsement with this same instructor. Still more in-depth than a lot of CFI spin endorsement flights that I've heard tell of, though.

My initial CFI certificate was in gliders, and I did a short spin flight for that endorsement. One of the primary focuses of that training event was how to keep the student from killing you in the process...being a tandem aircraft, there is a somewhat higher likelihood of the student doing something that you can't stop than in a side-by-side. That's where I learned about the "piano wire" technique. As a glider pilot, btw, inadvertent stalls and incipient spins are common while thermalling (you thermal at minimum airspeeds for small turn radius).

One of my early jobs involved giving aerobatic rides in Stearmans. One of the other pilots spent the better part of a day with me training spins in the airplane, including some more unusual entries and recoveries. Highly entertaining and informative.

The point of all this (you were wondering about that, weren't you?) is that, while I have always been "comfortable" with spins, the initial training I had as a student, which didn't amount to much more than a "watch this" followed by "monkey-see, monkey do" was extremely inadequate from a safety perspective. Fortunately, I was proficient and comfortable enough to deal with the spins I entered both intentionally and inadvertently early on, but my bag of luck got quite a bit lighter by the time I was 20 years old.

IF spin training is done, it needs to be thorough, IMO. "Invulnerabillity" runs pretty deep in pilots, particularly younger ones. Also IMO, besides the motor skills involved, there is a fairly large shortage of training on when spins are appropriate, and when they're not.

If I were to spin-train a CFI, I would make the program as extensive as I could based on my knowledge and experience, and would consider it minimal for the task.

Fly safe!

David

 

[poadeleted20]

Aren't just about all 172s approved for spins when loaded w/n utility CG range?

(usually case with 2 normal humans in front seat and somewhat less than full tank)

If you wander down the flight line checking W&B data, you may find that what you call "2 normal humans" may be more like "2 marathoners," and that two typical American adult males will required a very light fuel load to stay below the Utility weight limit. Those with real-world C-172 W&B data handy may feel free to chime in to prove me wrong.

In addition, most 172's at flight schools double as IR trainers, and spins beat the gyros to death. The school would probably want to designate one plane a spin trainer (we did that 30 years ago in Kentucky with a couple of our 18 Cessna 150's), take out the extra radios, and limit it to primary and spin training. If they don't have several 172's on the line, that might not be feasible.

Cessna 150/152s used to be ubiquitous at FBOs, but maybe the new Cessna SkyCatcher (which looks like s slicker 152) will fill in that missing niche?

Good question -- are they spin-approved?

 

[Ted]

At the time (I was 17) it took me a while to realize it was all about him and his ego.

There's no room for that in civilian flight training.

I agree 100%.

My first flight in a small plane wasn't quite so harrowing, but it was somewhat similar. The pilot had effectively zero interest in getting me interested in flying. Instead, his goal was to demonstrate to me how much he knew that I didn't know. In doing so, he completely discouraged me from ever becoming a pilot. I got out of the plane thinking "No way, there's too much, I don't want to do this." It was a chore, not fun, and if anything rather frightening. It wasn't until I went for a flight with Missa and she made it a fun experience for me that I then decided this was cool and something worth doing.

When I have passengers, I try to give them the kind of flight that will make the experience enjoyable for them, similar to when I give people a ride in my Jag. Some people are the sorts who want to see some of the more "fun" things like steep turns, slips, etc. (or in the Jag burnouts, hard turns, etc.). Most just want a gentle ride with mild turns, slow climbs and descents, etc. Oh, and zero turbulence! This is something that I am working on as part of my refinement bit with more hours - getting better at providing passengers what they want out of a flight to make them interested and intrigued enough to want to go flying again, and perhaps want to become pilots themselves. That's what it's all about, isn't it? Taking something you love and sharing it with others in such a way that they come to love it, too?

David, very interesting story! Thanks for the read!

 

[KennyFlys]

Anybody know if DA-20's are spin-approved?

DA-20:

c) Spinning NOT approved for aircraft equipped with altitude compensating fuel system.

d) Spinning (with wing flaps UP) approved for aircraft NOT equipped with altitude compensating fuel system and not in compleance with MSB DAC1-73-05 latest approved revision.

Section 2.9 on Page 2-7

 

[dmccormack]

When I have passengers, I try to give them the kind of flight that will make the experience enjoyable for them, similar to when I give people a ride in my Jag. Some people are the sorts who want to see some of the more "fun" things like steep turns, slips, etc. (or in the Jag burnouts, hard turns, etc.). Most just want a gentle ride with mild turns, slow climbs and descents, etc. Oh, and zero turbulence! This is something that I am working on as part of my refinement bit with more hours - getting better at providing passengers what they want out of a flight to make them interested and intrigued enough to want to go flying again, and perhaps want to become pilots themselves. That's what it's all about, isn't it? Taking something you love and sharing it with others in such a way that they come to love it, too?!

Excellent point.

I made up a Discovery Flight Syllabus and added it to my CFI binder.

Front and center is this section, which applies to any first time flight, not just an "Official Discovery Flight."

Considerations

• Clear morning (avoid thermal turbulence)
• Well maintained and clean airplane
• Short (avoid possibility of motion sickness)
• Comfortable, clean headsets
• Breath mints for the CFI
• Explain everything that will happen before it happens without information overload
• Time at the controls in flight regimes that don't require grabbing the yoke
• If time allows -- fly over landmarks familiar to the person taking the flight
• Work through any apprehension with care

We would all do well to heed to advice to be better advocates for GA, and less interested in "showing off."
IMHO, non-pilots already regard us with more respect than we probably deserve, so if you need the ego boost, dwell on that!
​

 

[poadeleted20]

DA-20: Section 2.9 on Page 2-7

Anybody know how many DA-20's have this "altitude-compensating fuel system"? Is that just the ones at the Air Force Academy at C-Springs, or what?

 

[Ted]

Excellent point.

Thank you! Although I think you make better points below:

Considerations

• Clear morning (avoid thermal turbulence)
• Well maintained and clean airplane
• Short (avoid possibility of motion sickness)
• Comfortable, clean headsets
• Breath mints for the CFI
• Explain everything that will happen before it happens without information overload
• Time at the controls in flight regimes that don't require grabbing the yoke
• If time allows -- fly over landmarks familiar to the person taking the flight
• Work through any apprehension with care

I'm going to make a new thread on this, because I want to discuss it more but it's getting way off topic.

 

[vontresc]

I'm guessing it may be the Bing Carbs on the Rotax engines (I have essentially the same on mt BMW airhead R65). Those Carbs are a constant vacuum carb. No idea why they aren't approved for spins. I'd guess the cetripetal forces cause fuel starvation.....

 

[KennyFlys]

Anybody know how many DA-20's have this "altitude-compensating fuel system"? Is that just the ones at the Air Force Academy at C-Springs, or what?

I almost flew with a school back at LZU who had a former AFA planes. I don't know how they were equipped beyond avionics. Unlike the standard Eclipse of that time, they had 530s in them.

 

[PittsDriver]

However, if that happens, I guarantee there will be a great uproar in opposition to the rule from NATA and other flight school organizations because the flight schools don't have, and don't have the cash to buy, airplanes in which they can legally do spin training.

Nor do they have many, if any, CFI's that feel comfortable doing them, much less teaching them. But that's just a catch-22 - they haven't been required to so no skill or capability exists. If I were king for a day, it wouldn't just be spin training that would be required but full aerobatic upset/recovery training consisting of at least 4 hours of instruction. Spins (upright, inverted, cross-over, and accelerated) as well as full on aerobatic upsets would be taught.

A lot of pilots and even CFI's would resist this but at the end of the day, they'd all be happier and more confident pilots than they'll ever be otherwise. It's my assertion that you should never, ever feel fear while in control of a flight. On the ground, thinking about you just lived through - go ahead and pee your pants. But while in the air, you need to feel well trained and confident enough to be in the zone working the problem. How are you going to do that if you've never had to recover from a departure from normal flight?

Same thing with simulated engine out, short field, spot landing practice. Someday, it'll be the difference.

 

[KennyFlys]

Nor do they have many, if any, CFI's that feel comfortable doing them, much less teaching them.

Bet on that one. During my CFI training, I found two other CFIs I flew with who would not let me do a full break stall. I was doing a power-on, turning stall and dang near scared the crap out of one. It became rather benign to me.

I get more bugged if I can't get the thing to stall like the DA-40 would not. It just sits there and buffets forever. You have to reduce power if you really want a full break.

 

[Maxmosbey]

According to my log book, I had spin training during a couple of lessons in 1965 as part of my private pilot training. I'm not sure if it was required back then, or not. Regardless, I do not even remember the experience.