Puchaz Spinning thread that might be of interest in light of the recent accident.

Do
we really want to teach full blown spins? Isn't spin entry and immediate
recovery, all we should be doing

Exactly!
Bob

In message , Bob Salvo
writes
Do
we really want to teach full blown spins? Isn't spin entry and immediate
recovery, all we should be doing

Exactly!
Bob
Well yes, and no. I think that the problem a lot of people have is that
they are taught spinning in simple benign aeroplanes that you have to
TELL to spin and come out with no encouragement.

Whilst this is good for the basics I truly believe that train and train
and train to do the harder stuff in aeroplanes (with appropriate
guidance and instructors) that have the capability to bite is the only
way to improve peoples' capabilities to the stage that they can handle
bad situations.

Too many people think they can deal with nasty situations because they
learnt (for instance) spinning in a K13 or 150 or similar. Several
years ago we had a group of power pilots, of the normal sport aviation
type - nothing extreme, turn up for some trial flights in gliders.
Several of them asked to be shown some spins and a suitable instructor
took them round. They were totally disorientated and didn't know what
to do. They had gone through all of the current training at the time
and as far as we know were good pilots.

The person in this thread who said that the training itself may be the
issue rather than doing training is, I believe, right. The old adage
"train hard fight easy" is true just about everywhere, the point is
"train hard"

As to the statement above. Yes, as soon as you know you are in a spin,
get out of it, if you can. However, learning all the other stuff
properly can only help.

Cheers

Robin

A very low hours pilot who has had enough shocks to realise how much he
has to learn.
--
Robin Birch

OK JJ, I'll bite (sorta)-

With spin entry training being done so often in benign-handling
ships, what in fact are we teaching/learning?

'Pull back, Pull back, okay kick in full rudder'-and
the thinking might go-'Gee, how does anyone get into
a spin, this is way to much work'

How does this apply the first time someone gets in
a ship that may fall off on its own?



At 18:24 23 January 2004, Mark James Boyd wrote:
In article ,
JJ Sinclair wrote:
It's winter, I'm bored and I haven't started any good
controversies (this year)
so here goes:

In the early 50's the USAF had a policy to give jump
training to all aircrew
personnel. They soon learned that they were getting
twice the injuries in
training that they were experiencing in real bail-outs.
They decided to stop
the actual jump training and just give PLF and kit
deployment, etc training.

So, JJ asks, In light of recent events that show its
been reining Puchaz's, Do
we really want to teach full blown spins? Isn't spin
entry and immediate
recovery, all we should be doing?

JJ Sinclair

With three times as many fatalities in training than
flying (helicopters),
one wonders the wisdom of practicing hundreds of autorotations
during
helicopter training as well.

Folks would like to plod through life thinking that they will
recognize the good old nose up, stall, kick rudder, this must be the
entry to a spin, I can recover from this. Who wouldn't.

The one we like to pound into their memory is the nose level on the
horizon, cross control (over shooting the final)feed in top aileron,
and away you go into the nicest spin entry. Recognize it and recover.
We don't need to let it wind up either.

Again a good cirriculum lets you do this training with a high degree
of safety, if the instructor is properly trained.


Stewart Kissel wrote in message ...
OK JJ, I'll bite (sorta)-

With spin entry training being done so often in benign-handling
ships, what in fact are we teaching/learning?

'Pull back, Pull back, okay kick in full rudder'-and
the thinking might go-'Gee, how does anyone get into
a spin, this is way to much work'

How does this apply the first time someone gets in
a ship that may fall off on its own?



At 18:24 23 January 2004, Mark James Boyd wrote:
In article ,
JJ Sinclair wrote:
It's winter, I'm bored and I haven't started any good
controversies (this year)
so here goes:

In the early 50's the USAF had a policy to give jump
training to all aircrew
personnel. They soon learned that they were getting
twice the injuries in
training that they were experiencing in real bail-outs.
They decided to stop
the actual jump training and just give PLF and kit
deployment, etc training.

So, JJ asks, In light of recent events that show its
been reining Puchaz's, Do
we really want to teach full blown spins? Isn't spin
entry and immediate
recovery, all we should be doing?

JJ Sinclair

With three times as many fatalities in training than
flying (helicopters),
one wonders the wisdom of practicing hundreds of autorotations
during
helicopter training as well.

That's the one that would get me. Low and slow, sneaking over a fence
needing juuuuuuust liiiiiitle rudder to line up. I think an instructor can
pound into your head NOT to do that, how to check yourself, and let you
practice your stupidity. On my own as a test pilot, I will certainly get
killed.



"SNOOP" wrote in message
om...
Folks would like to plod through life thinking that they will
recognize the good old nose up, stall, kick rudder, this must be the
entry to a spin, I can recover from this. Who wouldn't.

The one we like to pound into their memory is the nose level on the
horizon, cross control (over shooting the final)feed in top aileron,
and away you go into the nicest spin entry. Recognize it and recover.
We don't need to let it wind up either.

Again a good cirriculum lets you do this training with a high degree
of safety, if the instructor is properly trained.

If I took charge of a gliding club using Puchacz(s) for basic training, the
first thing I would do is pile them all in a heap in the corner of the field
and set fire to them.

This may come across as something of a controversial viewpoint. Let me explain.

As far as I know, we are now into double figures (in the UK alone) in terms of
fatalities when it comes to stall/spin accidents in the Puchacz. Compare this
to gliders like the twin Grob and K-21: there are far greater numbers of them
flying many times more hours with a much better record. Even older machines
such as the K-13 stand out well in comparison.

I really can't see the advantage of a training glider that spins so readily and
kills you if you get the recovery (slightly) wrong.

I think some of the instructing fraternity (in the UK) have become too focussed
on spinning as an 'exercise' and not something to be avoided. I believe that if
a significant group of pilots are having _inadvertent_ stall/spin
incidents/accidents when they are flying solo, then there is something very
very wrong with the most elementary training we are giving.

I read and hear much concerning technical details of spinning, i.e. what glider
X does after 5 turns with part aileron and that glider Y flicks when you yank
and stamp on the controls. All fairly irrelevant. If you get to the point of
having to do a full recovery one might question as to how you got there in the
first place. If you are low down (especially in machines like the Puchacz),
where most bad accidents occur, knowing how to recover from a spin is probably
not going to be of much use. Indeed, it may help to make the subsequent impact
unsurviveable.

What we seem to be failing to do is to instill a basic awareness of what the
glider is up to, and the _instinctive_ reactions required if the airframe stops
responding to your commands. Mike Cuming wrote a seminal article in S&G, some
years back, entiltled: "STOP PULLING THE STICK BACK!". This should be required
reading for all pre-solo students.

If you really want to show people full-blooded spins and recoveries, take them
up to a safe height in an aerobatic power aircraft, certified for those kind of
manoevres. You will be able to do much more for a lot less money.

Frankly, I see little point in making pilots deliberately demonstrate their
'expertise' in abusing a glider to the point it autorotates, then attempting to
do something about it. This is not the world aerobatic championships. I would
much rather see immediate instinctive corrections to any possible loss of
control.

To the experienced pilots/instructors reading this: when was the last time you
ended up (inadvertently) in a spin? Yes, you get wing drops in thermals etc.
but do you sit there, doing nothing, until the ground and sky start going round
very fast? No. I'm sure you don't, as you are alive to read this.

What drove me to stay up at night to write this post was a feeling of
anger/helplessness/sadness that yet more people have died in what I regard as a
pointless exercise. I knew the P1 in the double-fatal crash this week but not
his fifteen year old student.

Safe flying to all of you.

On 25 Jan 2004 01:26:39 GMT, (Edward Downham)
wrote:

If I took charge of a gliding club using Puchacz(s) for basic training, the
first thing I would do is pile them all in a heap in the corner of the field
and set fire to them.

This may come across as something of a controversial viewpoint. Let me explain.

As far as I know, we are now into double figures (in the UK alone) in terms of
fatalities when it comes to stall/spin accidents in the Puchacz. Compare this
to gliders like the twin Grob and K-21: there are far greater numbers of them
flying many times more hours with a much better record. Even older machines
such as the K-13 stand out well in comparison.

I really can't see the advantage of a training glider that spins so readily and
kills you if you get the recovery (slightly) wrong.

I think some of the instructing fraternity (in the UK) have become too focussed
on spinning as an 'exercise' and not something to be avoided. I believe that if
a significant group of pilots are having _inadvertent_ stall/spin
incidents/accidents when they are flying solo, then there is something very
very wrong with the most elementary training we are giving.

I read and hear much concerning technical details of spinning, i.e. what glider
X does after 5 turns with part aileron and that glider Y flicks when you yank
and stamp on the controls. All fairly irrelevant. If you get to the point of
having to do a full recovery one might question as to how you got there in the
first place. If you are low down (especially in machines like the Puchacz),
where most bad accidents occur, knowing how to recover from a spin is probably
not going to be of much use. Indeed, it may help to make the subsequent impact
unsurviveable.

What we seem to be failing to do is to instill a basic awareness of what the
glider is up to, and the _instinctive_ reactions required if the airframe stops
responding to your commands. Mike Cuming wrote a seminal article in S&G, some
years back, entiltled: "STOP PULLING THE STICK BACK!". This should be required
reading for all pre-solo students.

If you really want to show people full-blooded spins and recoveries, take them
up to a safe height in an aerobatic power aircraft, certified for those kind of
manoevres. You will be able to do much more for a lot less money.

Frankly, I see little point in making pilots deliberately demonstrate their
'expertise' in abusing a glider to the point it autorotates, then attempting to
do something about it. This is not the world aerobatic championships. I would
much rather see immediate instinctive corrections to any possible loss of
control.

To the experienced pilots/instructors reading this: when was the last time you
ended up (inadvertently) in a spin? Yes, you get wing drops in thermals etc.
but do you sit there, doing nothing, until the ground and sky start going round
very fast? No. I'm sure you don't, as you are alive to read this.

What drove me to stay up at night to write this post was a feeling of
anger/helplessness/sadness that yet more people have died in what I regard as a
pointless exercise. I knew the P1 in the double-fatal crash this week but not
his fifteen year old student.

Safe flying to all of you.




Thank you Edward. That is the best article on this issue I have ever
seen.

I agree 100% and particularly with the "do it in a power plane
designed for this". I did this two years ago in a Pitts S2A with an
experienced airshow pilot who is also an aerobatic instructor. We both
wore parachutes, had a proper briefing and agreed to abandon ship if
control not regained by 4000 feet AGL. All spins were begun from at
least 9000 feet. I learned more about spinning in that hour than in my
previous 35 years flying.

Now for a solution to keep everyone happy - I believe we have the
technology to build a realistic, close to full motion, spin simulator
at an affordable price.
This will allow through and complete exploration of the pre stall,
stall and spin regime for training and combine this with one real full
spin aircraft exercise at altitude with proper precautions and
briefing.

Lets do this and stop killing people in training exercises.

We lost a couple of people in Australia a few years ago in a Blanik
during an annual "spin check".
The spin turned into a spiral and the aircraft broke up in the
recovery. They weren't at high altitude nor wearing parachutes.

Many experienced pilots I know flat out refuse to do full spins during
annual checks as being an unnecessary risk. They will happily
demonstrate stalls and incipient spins.

Mike Borgelt

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 01:26:39 UTC, (Edward
Downham) wrote:

: As far as I know, we are now into double figures (in the UK alone) in terms of
: fatalities when it comes to stall/spin accidents in the Puchacz. Compare this
: to gliders like the twin Grob and K-21: there are far greater numbers of them
: flying many times more hours with a much better record.

But you have to take an overall view: how many of the pilots who die
in solo spins accidents do so because they were trained in nice, safe,
you-have-to-do-something-special-to-get-this-to-stall two seaters.

On your hypothetical airfield, would you fit all two seaters with
elevator stops so that pupils could never stall [1]?

Ian

[1i] In the conventional nose-up-slow-down-nose-up-slow-down-whoops
way
--

Ed,

You have got several things exactly right.

1. Before a glider can be in an inadvertent full spin, the pilot has to
get the following things wrong:

Fail to avoid the stall/spin altogether,
Fail to recognise that the glider is starting to stall/spin,
Or fail to use the correct recovery after recognising that it
has started to stall/spin.

2. There are times in every flight when a failure to avoid will be
disaster, and recovery is academic.

3. The standard BGA instruction does not give enough emphasis on or
satisfactory methods for avoiding altogether.

Ask most pilots and most instructors how to avoid, and they will give
the symptoms for recognising that the glider is already too close to
the stall and recovery action is already required.

Most pilots and instructors just do not understand the difference
between avoidance and recognition.

4. Gliders can depart into a spin entry without any of the symptoms
normally taught for recognising the approaching stall , except for
stick movement and position.

For the pilot, one moment it is flying normally, the next it is
pointing at the ground and rotating.

This can happen inadvertently to a glider which cannot be made to do
this deliberately.

5. The stall/spin occurs whenever, and only when, the angle of attack is
too high. The angle of attack is controlled by the elevator i.e. the
stick.

Moving the stick back, increasing angle of attack:
A long way back, angle of attack is high;
On the back stop, stall position.

Recovery depends on reducing the angle of attack, no reduction, no
recovery. Without a forward movement of the stick, recovery may not
be possible.

6. It should be a standard part of all handling instruction to teach
pupils to monitor stick position and movement.

This can and should be taught ahead of and parallel to monitoring
attitude and change of attitude This must be kept to the forefront
of the pupil's mind throughout training.

Only collision avoidance is more important than angle of attack (and
loss of control due to a stall/spin can lead to a collision).

7. Spinning is an aerobatic manoeuvre, some pilots do them for fun.
Instructors should only spin as required for instruction, and not use
instruction as an excuse for aerobatics. Aerobatic instruction is a
different thing altogether.

8. Whenever there is an accident or incident involving a stall/spin, the
first questions which should be asked a

If inadvertent, why did the pilot fail to avoid?
If deliberate, why was this exercise in this manner necessary?

Fly safe, avoid stalling!

Bill.

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.


"Edward Downham" wrote in message
...

If I took charge of a gliding club using Puchacz(s) for basic training,
the first thing I would do is pile them all in a heap in the corner of the
field and set fire to them.

This may come across as something of a controversial viewpoint. Let me
explain.

As far as I know, we are now into double figures (in the UK alone) in
terms of fatalities when it comes to stall/spin accidents in the Puchacz.
Compare this to gliders like the twin Grob and K-21: there are far greater
numbers of them flying many times more hours with a much better record.
Even older machines such as the K-13 stand out well in comparison.

I really can't see the advantage of a training glider that spins so
readily and kills you if you get the recovery (slightly) wrong.

I think some of the instructing fraternity (in the UK) have become too
focussed on spinning as an 'exercise' and not something to be avoided. I
believe that if a significant group of pilots are having _inadvertent_
stall/spin incidents/accidents when they are flying solo, then there is
something very very wrong with the most elementary training we are giving.

I read and hear much concerning technical details of spinning, i.e. what
glider X does after 5 turns with part aileron and that glider Y flicks
when you yank and stamp on the controls. All fairly irrelevant. If you
get to the point of having to do a full recovery one might question as to
how you got there in the first place. If you are low down (especially in
machines like the Puchacz), where most bad accidents occur, knowing how to
recover from a spin is probably not going to be of much use. Indeed, it
may help to make the subsequent impact unsurviveable.

What we seem to be failing to do is to instil a basic awareness of what
the glider is up to, and the _instinctive_ reactions required if the
airframe stops responding to your commands. Mike Cuming wrote a seminal
article in S&G, some years back, entitled: "STOP PULLING THE STICK
BACK!". This should be required reading for all pre-solo students.

If you really want to show people full-blooded spins and recoveries, take
them up to a safe height in an aerobatic power aircraft, certified for
those kind of manoeuvres. You will be able to do much more for a lot
less
money.

Frankly, I see little point in making pilots deliberately demonstrate
their 'expertise' in abusing a glider to the point it autorotates, then
attempting to do something about it. This is not the world aerobatic
championships. I would much rather see immediate instinctive corrections
to any possible loss of control.

To the experienced pilots/instructors reading this: when was the last time
you ended up (inadvertently) in a spin? Yes, you get wing drops in
thermals etc. but do you sit there, doing nothing, until the ground and
sky start going round very fast? No. I'm sure you don't, as you are
alive to read this.

What drove me to stay up at night to write this post was a feeling of
anger/helplessness/sadness that yet more people have died in what I regard
as a pointless exercise. I knew the P1 in the double-fatal crash this
week but not his fifteen year old student.

Safe flying to all of you.

Another one which works well in the Puchacz is the thermalling turn with
just a little too much into turn rudder. Bleed the speed back to the stall
and it rolls smoothly into a spin, just like many single seaters. Now
translate that into scratching at 800 feet ...

My view (for my own flying) is that being trained in spin
recognition/avoidance would have been of little relevance. I've now had a
fair amount of experience of putting a glider into a spin in most of the
likely modes I'd encounter in a single seater (final turns, thermalling
turns, failed winch launches, high speed stall with yaw etc.), and think I'm
far better placed to avoid a spin in the first place because of this.

Given that a reasonable performance single seater is likely to spin far more
readily than a training glider, because that's the trade off to achieve the
extra performance, I'm never really confident flying one until I have spun
it and noted any subtleties in spin entry and recovery.

Are those of you who don't want to spin sure that you would recognise the
imminence of a spin in your single seater?

"SNOOP" wrote in message
om...
Folks would like to plod through life thinking that they will
recognize the good old nose up, stall, kick rudder, this must be the
entry to a spin, I can recover from this. Who wouldn't.

The one we like to pound into their memory is the nose level on the
horizon, cross control (over shooting the final)feed in top aileron,
and away you go into the nicest spin entry. Recognize it and recover.
We don't need to let it wind up either.

Again a good cirriculum lets you do this training with a high degree
of safety, if the instructor is properly trained.


Stewart Kissel wrote in
message ...
OK JJ, I'll bite (sorta)-

With spin entry training being done so often in benign-handling
ships, what in fact are we teaching/learning?

'Pull back, Pull back, okay kick in full rudder'-and
the thinking might go-'Gee, how does anyone get into
a spin, this is way to much work'

How does this apply the first time someone gets in
a ship that may fall off on its own?



At 18:24 23 January 2004, Mark James Boyd wrote:
In article ,
JJ Sinclair wrote:
It's winter, I'm bored and I haven't started any good
controversies (this year)
so here goes:

In the early 50's the USAF had a policy to give jump
training to all aircrew
personnel. They soon learned that they were getting
twice the injuries in
training that they were experiencing in real bail-outs.
They decided to stop
the actual jump training and just give PLF and kit
deployment, etc training.

So, JJ asks, In light of recent events that show its
been reining Puchaz's, Do
we really want to teach full blown spins? Isn't spin
entry and immediate
recovery, all we should be doing?

JJ Sinclair

With three times as many fatalities in training than
flying (helicopters),
one wonders the wisdom of practicing hundreds of autorotations
during
helicopter training as well.