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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote: Irregardless, the sight picture of a spin is unforgetable and unmistakable... once you know what it looks like. You are so right about that! An approach to stall isn't the same as a stall. I agree. I want to be comfortable enough with stalls/spins to recognize and recover from both at any point in their development cycle. Chris |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote: Ron Natalie wrote: Dropping a wing is not a spin, just a sloppy stall. The time is better spent on nailing stalls than spinning the airplane. Irregardless, the sight picture of a spin is unforgetable and unmistakable... once you know what it looks like. An approach to stall isn't the same as a stall. If you've ever carried a load of ice on the hairy edge of a stall, you'll appreciate being able to balance yourself on the line if necessary. I had a 135 checkride in a C-402 once where the check airman said, "let's do stalls". OK, to me, that means STALL. It doesn't mean approach to stall. My first 135 chief pilot, a grizzlied old USAF pilot, taught me to do full stalls in the 402. Good God... you would have thought I farted in church by the stunned reaction I got when I didn't recover when the first burble was felt. I recovered immediately after I felt the aircraft stall, and not before. "Let's try that again", he said. We did the same thing again. It was only after some discussion that I found that he meant to recover before I actually stalled. The other guy along for the ride claimed that he NEVER did full stalls in a twin. Well, it takes all kinds I guess. If it was good enough for my old chief pilot it was good enough for me, but if these guys wanted a recovery initiated when the stall is imminent, I can do that too. And did. If anybody doesn't know, the C-402 stalls the same as the C-172. I don't recommend it with asymetrical power though.... I'd rather find that out by going through it as an exercise rather than discover it turning final one engine out in turbulence .. and you're point about recovery on the onset of the stall It is a commonly taught exercise nowadays |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
You are mostly correct. According to FAA-H-8083-3, "Airplane Flying
Handbook," pages 5-12 through 5-13 under the heading of "Sping Procedures": "The entry phase [of a spin] is where the pilot provides the necessary elements for a spin, either accidentally or intentionally." "The incipient phase [of a spin] is from the time the airplane stalls and rotation starts until the spin has fully developed." "The developed phase [of a spin] occurs when the airplane's angular rotation rate, airspeed, and vertical speed are stabilized while in a flightpath that is nearly vertical." --- Now, You are correct in that dropping a wing is not necessarily a spin, but it CAN be considered the entry phase of a spin. We were in an incipient spin based in the sight picture having gone way screwy on me. My instructor was demonstrating how uncoodinated flight during a power-on stall can cause the plane to snap and very quickly develop into a spin. I don't yet know how far the spin developed, but I would think it was between 1/4-1/2 turn. Personally, I would feel much more comfortable knowing I can both recognize and recover from a stall (at any point in the stall process) and recognize and recover from a spin (at any phase of a spin). If that means I spend extra time on stalls and spins, fine by me! You only get to screw up once if you don't recover. Cheers! Chris Ron Natalie wrote: Dropping a wing is not a spin, just a sloppy stall. The time is better spent on nailing stalls than spinning the airplane. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Chris G. wrote:
Considering the most likely spot for a power-on stall is just after takeoff, I want that spin training (which we're going to do in a C150). I'm quite happy with the training I was given that allows me to recognize an impending stall and avoid that. If I don't stall the aircraft, it's not going to spin. George Patterson Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry, and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing? Because she smells like a new truck. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
George Patterson wrote:
Chris G. wrote: Considering the most likely spot for a power-on stall is just after takeoff, I want that spin training (which we're going to do in a C150). I'm quite happy with the training I was given that allows me to recognize an impending stall and avoid that. If I don't stall the aircraft, it's not going to spin. And I'm happy that you are happy with substandard training. However, I'm not happy with substandard training. Not training in spins is like not training on PP for the instrument rating. Sure, if you avoid a vacuum failure, then you avoid the need for PP. The trouble is, sometimes bad things happen... Matt |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Matt Whiting wrote:
And I'm happy that you are happy with substandard training. Uh .. That's *standard* training, thank you very much. George Patterson Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry, and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing? Because she smells like a new truck. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message ... However, this is meaingless. The issue isn't how many were killed by spins during training vs. otherwise, the issue is how many people recovered from a spin and thus weren't killed. That is not even close to the issue. The issue is how many dead while spins were required vs. how many dead after the requirement was dropped. The later is a smaller number thus the logical option. It is sort of like looking at stats for engine failures with singles vs. twins. We know how many singles lose an engine as they make a power-off landing, often off airport. We certainly do not know that number. There are hundreds if not thousands of unreported off field landings due to engine failure every year. We don't know, however, how many twins didn't make an emergency or off-airport because they were able to make it to an airport on their remaining engine. I also don't see the logic in spin recognition vs. spin training. I don't see how you can learn to be proficient in spin entry Who cares if one is proficient in spin entry. For normal flight it is a totally useless ability. and recovery without learning to recognize a stall and incipient spin. So this whole concept of stall recognition vs. stall training seems pretty illogical to me. We are not talking about stalls. Stalls do not equal spins. But as long as you brought it up, learning to recognize and recover from an incipent stall (NOT SPIN) will prevent a spin. It's the old chain of events scenario. Break the chain early on and you don't need to worry about what might happen later. This makes spin recovery an unneeded ability. If you've screwed the pooch bad enough to get into a spin you are probably out of altitude anyway and all the training in the world won't do you any good. It's all extremely logical. Matt |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Dave Stadt wrote:
We are not talking about stalls. Stalls do not equal spins. But as long as you brought it up, learning to recognize and recover from an incipent stall (NOT SPIN) will prevent a spin. It's the old chain of events scenario. Break the chain early on and you don't need to worry about what might happen later. This makes spin recovery an unneeded ability. If you've screwed the pooch bad enough to get into a spin you are probably out of altitude anyway and all the training in the world won't do you any good. It's all extremely logical. So I'm curious. Have you ever spun an airplane? -- Mortimer Schnerd, RN VE |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote in message ... Dave Stadt wrote: We are not talking about stalls. Stalls do not equal spins. But as long as you brought it up, learning to recognize and recover from an incipent stall (NOT SPIN) will prevent a spin. It's the old chain of events scenario. Break the chain early on and you don't need to worry about what might happen later. This makes spin recovery an unneeded ability. If you've screwed the pooch bad enough to get into a spin you are probably out of altitude anyway and all the training in the world won't do you any good. It's all extremely logical. So I'm curious. Have you ever spun an airplane? -- Mortimer Schnerd, RN VE Yep. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Dave Stadt wrote:
So I'm curious. Have you ever spun an airplane? Yep. And you learned *nothing* worthwhile from that experience? I sure found it an eye opener the one time I inadvertently spun. If I hadn't known what it was and what to do about it I could see myself augering in. On a practical note, I used to fly overgrossed aircraft from time to time. I've also carried my share of ice. To suggest that I'd never stall/spin involves a whole bunch of wishing. I am reminded of a prospective pilot my employer was interviewing: what would he do if he stumbled into a thunderstorm. Expecting the usual techniques, I was surprised to hear him say: "I don't go into thunderstorms". My boss kept pushing him on the subject: "Well, if you somehow did, what would you do?" The prospect kept bleating he didn't fly in thunderstorms. Well, I don't either, willingly, but sometimes they're hiding out there. He might as well have said he didn't ever fly in real IFR. He didn't get the job. I wonder what he'd have said if the boss asked him what would he do if the aircraft entered a spin? -- Mortimer Schnerd, RN VE |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rolling a Non Aerobat 150 | Jose | Piloting | 1 | May 2nd 05 03:59 PM |
Rolling a Non Aerobat 150 | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 1 | April 29th 05 07:31 PM |
Rolling a Non Aerobat 150 | kage | Owning | 0 | April 29th 05 04:26 AM |
Rolling a Non Aerobat 150 | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 4 | April 28th 05 05:06 PM |
??Build rolling tool chest? | Michael Horowitz | Owning | 15 | January 27th 05 04:56 AM |