![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If you were within the permitted CoG range, and used
the standard recovery method, the spin behaviour you described is definitely non-compliant with JAR 22 certification rules. JAR22.221 states that a sailplane certificated for intentional spinning must be able to recover from a fully developed spin (5 turns) within 1 turn after recovery action is done. This has to be demonstrated in several loading and control conditions. Additionally, this paragraph states that it must be impossible to obtain uncontrollable spins with any use of the controls. The Puchacz may not have been certificated to JAR 22, but possibly to the older OSTIV rules. However, I very much doubt that this type of behaviour would have been acceptable under older certification rules, although the verification/testing requirements might have been less strict in earlier days. Geir At 01:00 28 January 2004, Tim Shea wrote: I love to spin. It's exciting. I took aerobatic training with Wayne Handley and was taught spin recoveries by him. I have direct experience spinning the Puchacz at Minden. This is what I remember from my experience. Your mileage may vary. With friends (usually lighter than me) in the front, I spun it while sitting in the back seat more than a dozen times. The CG was within the published range and I didn't have any trouble with simple recovery- stick centered and forward and rudder away from the direction of rotation. Worked great. I should mention that I used to be 50 lbs heavier than I am now, but still in the published range for the plane. During the training towards my instructors rating, I spun the Puch twice with my instructor. The first 2 or so rotation spin I was able to recover normally, no sweat. The second manuver was quite different. I was asked to let the spin develop a little deeper for the second. After 4 or so rotations, the nose seemed to float up and the rotation *seemed* to slow considerably. I remember thinking that this is cool! Kind of like floating. When it was time for the recovery I applied the control inputs I'd been taught (as specified above) and much to my surprise, nothing different happened.....for a long time. I estimate that we completed another 5+ rotations nose high before it broke, rolled over and recovered. I had the stick centered and against the front stop with the rudder also pegged away from the rotation. We recovered with several (4 or 5) thousand feet under us (we'd been playing at cloudbase at about 15K). Once on the ground, we discussed this incident in the grumpy bar for at least an hour. I (and he) decided to never spin the Puch again. I didn't. I doubt he did either. I had heard of this happening before. I assumed that it was from operation outside of the design envelope. Apparently I was wrong. John Shelton probably said it best: 'On my own as a test pilot, I will certainly get killed'. I felt like a dumb-ass for quite a while (more than usual) after that. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Puchaz Spinning thread that might be of interest in light of the recent accident. | Al | Soaring | 134 | February 9th 04 03:44 PM |
Spinning (mis)concepts | Arnold Pieper | Soaring | 106 | February 7th 04 01:02 PM |
Spinning Horizon | Mike Adams | Owning | 8 | December 26th 03 01:35 AM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |