Rolling a Non Aerobat 150

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:36:51 -0400, "Cox" wrote:

If you do manage to get out of a spinning aircraft, I wouls estimate close
to a 100% better chance of survival if you have a chute on. I sure would
hate to be the person who was able to get out of the so called "impossible
aircraft to get out of" only to find they didn't have a chute on.

Wear a chute, what can it hurt?

Adam

Then there's this:

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?C...-7233c1bb43f8&

(Hope it's not a repost. It's about the 150 rudder bumpers jamming.)

Don

Cox wrote:
If you do manage to get out of a spinning aircraft, I wouls estimate close
to a 100% better chance of survival if you have a chute on. I sure would
hate to be the person who was able to get out of the so called "impossible
aircraft to get out of" only to find they didn't have a chute on.

Wear a chute, what can it hurt?

Adam

Adam Cope
www.dcaerobatics.com
703-623-9445



I totally agree with this. The " you'll never get out of this airplane
because of the door" routine is something I've heard repeated many times
through my career teaching aerobatics. My standard answer and "lecture"
on this issue is as follows;
For spins, even if the regulations don't call for chutes, I always
recommend wearing them. I always had chutes available for whatever
aircraft we were using for spin training.
A lot has been written and said about the difficulties involved in
getting out of Aerobats, Citabrias, and Decathlons.
There is no doubt that especially with a structural failure, exiting one
of these aircraft could be iffy. That's why any good instructor not only
supplies chutes for spin training, but as well performs a complete
egress brief specific to aircraft type to the point where once the bail
out call has been made, each occupant knows what the exit procedure will
be. This is especially critical in tandem aircraft.
I should mention that even with the most complete egress briefing, there
is STILL an element of doubt that a successful exit from these airplanes
can be executed in the time available under extreme g in a post
structural failure.
The factors involving a successful bail out are so diverse that there
are just no guarantees.
In the Pitts S2 for example, if the upper wing fails, the flying wires
will most likely remain attached and the upper wing will beat the
occupants to death before a bail out can be achieved.
All this being considered, the use of chutes is not only recommended,
but in my opinion a necessary part of every non- standard flight whether
it be aerobatics or spin training.
The bottom line is that wearing a chute gives you a fighting chance for
survival. Not wearing a chute gives you no chance at all.
Its a smart pilot who takes advantage of all available options!
Dudley Henriques

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...


Cox wrote:
If you do manage to get out of a spinning aircraft, I wouls estimate
close to a 100% better chance of survival if you have a chute on. I sure
would hate to be the person who was able to get out of the so called
"impossible aircraft to get out of" only to find they didn't have a
chute on.

Wear a chute, what can it hurt?

Adam

Adam Cope
www.dcaerobatics.com
703-623-9445



I totally agree with this. The " you'll never get out of this airplane
because of the door" routine is something I've heard repeated many times
through my career teaching aerobatics. My standard answer and "lecture" on
this issue is as follows;
For spins, even if the regulations don't call for chutes, I always
recommend wearing them. I always had chutes available for whatever
aircraft we were using for spin training.
A lot has been written and said about the difficulties involved in getting
out of Aerobats, Citabrias, and Decathlons.
There is no doubt that especially with a structural failure, exiting one
of these aircraft could be iffy. That's why any good instructor not only
supplies chutes for spin training, but as well performs a complete egress
brief specific to aircraft type to the point where once the bail out call
has been made, each occupant knows what the exit procedure will be. This
is especially critical in tandem aircraft.
I should mention that even with the most complete egress briefing, there
is STILL an element of doubt that a successful exit from these airplanes
can be executed in the time available under extreme g in a post structural
failure.
The factors involving a successful bail out are so diverse that there are
just no guarantees.
In the Pitts S2 for example, if the upper wing fails, the flying wires
will most likely remain attached and the upper wing will beat the
occupants to death before a bail out can be achieved.
All this being considered, the use of chutes is not only recommended, but
in my opinion a necessary part of every non- standard flight whether it be
aerobatics or spin training.
The bottom line is that wearing a chute gives you a fighting chance for
survival. Not wearing a chute gives you no chance at all.
Its a smart pilot who takes advantage of all available options!
Dudley Henriques


Dudley,
Could you give some specifics about exiting a citabria?
I used to do aerobatics in one and always wore a chute. I never suspected
that I would have trouble exiting if I pulled the door hinge pins, I thought
the door would vanish and leave me a big hole to climb out.
The only serious instructor I had was in a Stearman and he never discussed
exiting in case of trouble.
Obviously I was completely ignorant. Better to learn late than never.

On Mar 23, 1:36 pm, "Cox" wrote:
If you do manage to get out of a spinning aircraft, I wouls estimate close
to a 100% better chance of survival if you have a chute on. I sure would
hate to be the person who was able to get out of the so called "impossible
aircraft to get out of" only to find they didn't have a chute on.

Wear a chute, what can it hurt?


And have quick release pins on the doors with the handles -inside-

A CFI may instruct spins to any level of pilot without
parachutes being worn. The spin is required for the CFI
applicant, but since it is required for some level of
certificate, it may be taught to any pilot. Of course no
passengers may be aboard, just the CFI and the "student."

91.307
(c) Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an
approved parachute, no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying
any person (other than a crewmember) may execute any
intentional maneuver that exceeds-

(1) A bank of 60 degrees relative to the horizon; or

(2) A nose-up or nose-down attitude of 30 degrees relative
to the horizon.

(d) Paragraph (c) of this section does not apply to-

(1) Flight tests for pilot certification or rating; or

(2) Spins and other flight maneuvers required by the
regulations for any certificate or rating when given by-

(i) A certificated flight instructor; or

(ii) An airline transport pilot instructing in accordance
with §61.67 of this chapter





"Tom Inglima" wrote in message
.. .
| Spins have NEVER been in the private pilot PTS. The PTS
(Practical Test
| Standard) only has been in existence for around 20 years
or so. The last
| time spins were required for a Private Certificate was
back in the early
| 1950's or maybe the late 1940's. Note that there is
nothing that prevents
| an instructor from teaching spins to a student pilot.
However you would
| have to wear parachutes to be legal since the regs only
allow spins without
| the wearing of parachutes for people training for a flight
instructor
| certificate.
|
| The predecessor for the PTS was the Flight Test Guides.
These were slim
| volumes of not more than 20 pages and about 2 or 3 inches
wide and about 4
| inches high. In any case they were smaller than a 3 by 5
index card. they
| had very broad descriptions of maneuvers' and gave
examiners and inspectors
| wide latitude in what and how they wanted you to perform
various maneuvers.
| Part 61 was actually a much better regulation then in that
it clearly made
| the CFI responsible for preparing a competent pilot that
was able to show
| good judgment.
|
| The predecessor regs and guidance was to list the actual
maneuvers in the
| reg. If you could get a monkey to somehow do the maneuver
a certificate
| would be issued.
|
| Tom Inglima
|
| "Chris G." nospam@noemail wrote in message
|
eenews.net...
| Besides, spin training is NOT required for a private
pilot certificate.
| Spin AWARENESS (aka recognizing you're going to get into
a spin) is
| required. Spins are not part of the PTS anymore though.
|
| I don't necessarily think that omitting spins from the
PTS is the best
| move the FAA has made, but I don't know the whole story.
I know I'm
| having my instructor make sure he teaches me spins in
the 150 I'm learning
| in. I believe that training in spins and spin recovery
is a very
| important skills that could save my life one day.
|
| Chris
|
|
| wrote:
| On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:46:42 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
| wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:
|
|
| wrote in message
| ...
|
| On 27 Apr 2005 09:43:30 -0700, "Noah Fiedel"

| wrote:
|
|
| In addition, were you & your instructor wearing
parachutes
| as required for aerobatic flight?
|
|
| Not required, since spin training is required for a
rating.
|
| Looked to me like a roll not a spin.
|
|
| Oooops.
|
| Never mind.
|
|
|
|

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:41:47 -0500, "Tom Inglima"
wrote in
:

Note that there is nothing that prevents
an instructor from teaching spins to a student pilot.

If the aircraft is not certified for the maneuver, that would prevent
that maneuver from being performed in that aircraft without violating
federal regulation.


[Newsgroups: trimmed]

The last time spins were required for a Private Certificate was back in the early
1950's or maybe the late 1940's.

I can verify that spins were required in 1947.

vince norris