No spin training in the US?

"jsmith" wrote in message ...
It's not the spinning that may break the aircraft, it is the recovery.
Let it go too long and build up too much airspeed and pull too hard and,
yes, something may break.

Or the non-recovery... They tend to be rather hard on the aircraft...

Each 172 seems to have different spin characteristics. I have spun a
172N many times during my CFI training. However, I am unable to even
make a half turn spin in our current 172N. It just goes into a steep
spiral. Not sure why. The 152 is a great airplane for spins.





Mark Morissette wrote in
:

I spin our 172 regularly just to stay sharp at recovery, and besides
that, it's great fun!

Curious why are you doing spins in a 172? Your own plane?

Besides it not being allowed unless you are in the Utility W&B
envelope, from everything I've read and understand the 172 is not a
great plane for spin training regardless.

The flightschool I'm at won't allow spin training in their 172's
regardless of W&B within utility... 152's are mandatory when that
portion of the curriculum arrives.

- you don't get "tossed around" inside the aircraft.

True, although I wouldn't leave my kneeboard or a pen loose in the
cockpit during spins, regardless.

- It is gentle on the aircraft...

Well, I could debate that one..

- Is a non issue with modern gyros

From everything I've read, true.

-The g's on recovery seldom exceed 1.5 G's...

Again, from student to student that could change.. With a good
recovery and plenty of alt, that sounds about right.. I'd be surprised
if I pulled more then 1.5 on the recovery...however, my CFI has
apparently had some "not so pretty" recoveries that resulted in not so
pretty recoveries, which probably exceeded 1.5g by a sizable margin.

- The attitude is VERY unusual,- the windscreen is totally full of
"ground" , and it's rotating, and it REALLY gets your attention! I
believe it is a good idea to do enough of them to eliminate the
"surprise" factor, and have the "automatic reflexes" of recovery kick
into gear early.

Yep! My exact resoning behind the fact that I feel spin training
should still be mandatory.

There is about 2 - 3 seconds of "oh ****" in your 1st spin that could
kill you close to the ground....

Yep! :-)

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 12:14:49 -0400, Mark Morissette
wrote:

Personally, when I *know* I'm going to be intentionally entering a
spin, I'd prefer to have a few thousand feet between me and the
ground. For that matter, it's written into the CAR's that recovery is
made at least 2000'AGL...Or perhaps 2500AGL, I forget exactly..I
should look it up... It's been a while since I completed the spin
training, and it's one of those numbers thats slipped my mind since.

The rule of thumb in the Great Lakes was 250 feet per complete
revolution. And I now see, looking back at the article I wrote at the
time, that we stalled the aircraft at 4500 AGL.

When we recovered from the first spin (130 mph in the dive), the Great
Lakes was pulling 3.2 gs. Matt assured me that the Piper Cub was good
for 3.2 gs. I will take his word for it! 3.2 is a lot.




-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net

On 2005-04-03 07:00, Nomen Nescio wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

From: Mark Morissette

The fact that there was such a large number of spin training related
accidents in the USA makes me wonder if perhaps alot of instructors
are just not quite up to their task?


I don't think instructors should shoulder the entire burden, although I will
admit that they can be a contributing factor. I tend to believe the problem
may lie in the definition of "suitable for spin training". There are just some
GA trainers out there that, while certified for spins, are really NOT suitable
for spin training. The limits in aerodynamics and control authority make
it too easy for spins to get out of hand, especially with a student at the
controls.
Now, I'm a strong proponent of spin training for everyone who flys. But I think
the training should be done in a plane that's designed, built, and certified for
aerobatics. 'Cause, make no mistake about it, spins are aerobatics. Sure,
bad things can still happen in aircraft designed for aerobatics. But it gives
a good instructor a little wider aerodynamic margin to bail a student out of
something stupid.
Then, after the training, during that brief moment of inattention that should never
occur but does, the pilot may instinctively add that one little control movement
that stops a spin one microsecond after it begins and keeps his Cessna from
winding up like an end mill and plunging a hole in the ground.
Of course, the problem with that thought is that there are so few qualified
instructors and even fewer qualified aircraft.


Well, spin training isn't required for PPL in Sweden either, but my club
encourages every student to take a spin-lesson with one of our
acrobatics instructors in a plane suited to the task.
(i.e. no intentional spinning in the Pipers or Cessnas)

/Rolf

jsmith wrote:
It's not the spinning that may break the aircraft, it is the
recovery.
Let it go too long and build up too much airspeed and pull too hard
and,
yes, something may break.


This would be a new one on me. I spin my Cherokee regularly and have
never run across this problem. Are you saying that your airspeed is
building up during the spin? If that's the case, I'd venture to guess
that you are in a spiral dive rather than a spin.

In most of the planes I've spun, airspeed does not increase with the
duration of the spinning. I end up with about the same speed at the
end of one turn or four turns.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting "let it go too long".

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

C J Campbell wrote:

Humph. Tell my boss that. He won't allow the 172's to be used for
spin
training, citing that it greatly shortens the life of the gyros,
knocking
them around from stop to stop.

The (non-cageable) gyros in my Cherokee do seem to take a beating
when I'm out doing spins. It's not uncommon for the AI to tumble when
the plane rolls over into the spin entry. I've always assumed that
gyro maintenance was going to be part of the cost of spinning the
plane, but surprisingly, the gyros are just fine. I've been spinning
them regularly for 10 years now and I still haven't had one die on me.


John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

John
I waa about to address that one as well as high G loads on recovery. It
requires the aircraft to be stalled for the spin, and if its stalled,
the airspeed isn't building! If there is excessive G loading at time of
recovery, it would suggest someone isn't doing a smooth recovery and is
applying way too much control pressures which could result in a
secondary and an unanticipated stall/spin going in a unknown direction?
Been my experience in thousands of spins that the airspeed is well
within the norms and without excessive G loading.
As for the gyros, I haven't seen them deteriorate below IFR standards
after a lot of spins. Once upon a time, back 30-40 years ago that was
not the case.
Best Regards
Ol S&B

What really stops spin trainnnig for pilots is instrument training.
Today, FBOs want to be able to use ALL their planes for instrument
instruction. It no longer makes sense to have different aircraft.
Spinning an instrument training aircraft is a really bad idea because
it bangs up the gyros and increases maintenance costs on the gyros. I
would love to give my students spin training in the Cherokee but the
FBO doesn't allow it because its an instrument platform too.

-Robert, CFI

Andrew, - with the 1974 172M the leading edge radius of the airfoil
was increased, making it harder to stall/spin.

Having said that , we have various versions of "when" this ACTUALLY
took place, some suggest it was DURING the M or N model year. You
could have flown the same model/yr, but have had 2 different wings..

Dono, but may be possible...


Dave

On 3 Apr 2005 22:41:57 -0500, Andrew Sarangan
wrote:

Each 172 seems to have different spin characteristics. I have spun a
172N many times during my CFI training. However, I am unable to even
make a half turn spin in our current 172N. It just goes into a steep
spiral. Not sure why. The 152 is a great airplane for spins.





Mark Morissette wrote in
:

I spin our 172 regularly just to stay sharp at recovery, and besides
that, it's great fun!

Curious why are you doing spins in a 172? Your own plane?

Besides it not being allowed unless you are in the Utility W&B
envelope, from everything I've read and understand the 172 is not a
great plane for spin training regardless.

The flightschool I'm at won't allow spin training in their 172's
regardless of W&B within utility... 152's are mandatory when that
portion of the curriculum arrives.

- you don't get "tossed around" inside the aircraft.

True, although I wouldn't leave my kneeboard or a pen loose in the
cockpit during spins, regardless.

- It is gentle on the aircraft...

Well, I could debate that one..

- Is a non issue with modern gyros

From everything I've read, true.

-The g's on recovery seldom exceed 1.5 G's...

Again, from student to student that could change.. With a good
recovery and plenty of alt, that sounds about right.. I'd be surprised
if I pulled more then 1.5 on the recovery...however, my CFI has
apparently had some "not so pretty" recoveries that resulted in not so
pretty recoveries, which probably exceeded 1.5g by a sizable margin.

- The attitude is VERY unusual,- the windscreen is totally full of
"ground" , and it's rotating, and it REALLY gets your attention! I
believe it is a good idea to do enough of them to eliminate the
"surprise" factor, and have the "automatic reflexes" of recovery kick
into gear early.

Yep! My exact resoning behind the fact that I feel spin training
should still be mandatory.

There is about 2 - 3 seconds of "oh ****" in your 1st spin that could
kill you close to the ground....

Yep! :-)