On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 12:30:13 UTC, (Edward
Downham) wrote:
: The point I am making is that if you make a low, slow, under-banked and
: over-ruddered final turn, no amount of 'spin training' is going to protect you
: from what is going to happen next.

Indeed. But spin training may have given you the idea that something
nasty might happen in those circumstances. As it is, I remain very
worried indeed by the training regime in many, many clubs which says
"Today we will spin. We will use a special glider, or we will add
unusual bits to the glider you normally fly". The result is an
overwhelming impression that it can't happen to me....

: In using modern accident prevention techniques, we try and break the 'causal
: chain' in the sequence of events leading up to the accident itself. I would put
: forward the premise that spin recovery (at low level) is beyond the end of that
: chain, i.e. you have already decided to have an accident and are now along for
: the ride.

I agree completely.

: You do not need a snappy spinning/stalling glider to instill these most basic
: airmanship/handling skills into a student. Any aircraft will do.

I don't agree. You (one) can give all the lectures one likes, but if
the training glider doesn't do it, the pupil will not believe it.

: I don't remember advocating 'non-stalling' trainers, simply that too much
: effort is going into an exercise which has a dubious risk/reward ratio. For
: many years we had no sailplanes at LGC which could be spun and there was no
: such training. What we _did_ do was concentrate on the 'old chestnuts' like:
: "Never low AND slow" and properly planned and controlled approaches.

Did it work?

Ian