Too Spin or Not to Spin – To Turn Back or Not to Turn Back – The Question and The Answer?

[SSCBD]

I keep running into this sort of scenario on the boards, here may be a solution no one will like.

 

BACKGROUND Short Story

 

Let’s start back in the days when GA had the Piper Tomahawk which came into Australia around 1975. Pipers version of a two seat (specs below) trainer for GA against the Cessna 150.

 

Now what is so very interesting is that this beastie was a widow maker and spun at the drop of a hat.

 

Long story short - After killing a few people in USA and here -- “it was then a requirement that ALL students before they go solo got a spinning endorsement” in Australia.

 

That’s right teach them to do full spins and recover before solo, which was not hard at all in the traumahawk as it was known back in the day.

 

Full power stall was all it needed or a low speed turn with speed bleeding off and you could see the earth rotate in front of your face if you were high enough, if not you were dead.

 

What it did teach, ‘STUDENTS, Pilots and Instructors’ was a VERY, VERY, Extremely (get the point) healthy respect for height, angle of bank and speed which was magnified in the circuit area and during practice engine failures with all students and instructors knowing the cause and to recognize the feel of the aircraft, with quick and correct recovery procedure even before "it developed". Flying this beast all those years ago and still today no matter what aircraft I am in GA or RAA, I always have this healthy respect of speed and angle of bank at or below circuit height from flying this beast.

 

Learning how to spin in a GA aircraft teaches also - - ‘As a Secondary Effect’ - galvanizes the voice in the back of your head if you have an engine failure at take of -NOT TO TURN BACK – AND LOWER THE NOSE QUICKLY - AND FLY THE AIRCRAFT.

 

Here’s The Problem - some people are terrified OF STALLS AND SPINS and they may give up flying. Also in that case should people be allowed to hold a license – but that’s another can of worms for another day.

 

As it not you we may care for but your passager!

 

THE ANSWER for RAA - you will not like it - Get a GA spin endorsement or do some time in a GA spin endorsed aircraft with an instructor and learn all there is to know about stalls and spins. You will never forget it and then hopefully you will never be a number with CASA. (please don’t tell me it can’t happen to you in your RAA aircraft, saying it just won’t spin. It does not have to spin it only needs to stall at the wingtip and you are gone).

 

With some old and the new faster aircraft being built and flying around it may be worth you time to think about it!

 

So should RAA pilots and GA coming into RAA get spin endorsed? That is the real question?

 

Also

 

Some comments below from guys who flew the tomahawk back in the day!

 

1. The Tomahawk was changed structurally so much between it;s certification flight tests and production, that the Piper Engineers and Test Pilots said it is NOT THE AIRPLANE WHICH WAS CERTITIFED !. Piper had modified the wing after and made it more flexible.
    
   2. Spin recovery is extremely difficult. In the context of a approach stall/spin recovery it IS impossible.
    
    
    
   

 

 

3. The accident record of the Tomahawk as a trainer was appalling, and the industry that buys them ran the other way screaming. Many airplanes today are placarded against spinning, including the Bellanca which has been used successfully in airshow routines. Nobody in his right mind would want to get anywhere the limits in the tomahawk .

 

Being proficient in a fair airplane beats being incompetent in the best one.

 

Specifications for Piper Tomahawk (could be a RAA aircraft if we get 750kg )

 

• Crew: 2
   
   
   
   
  
• Length: 23 ft 1¼ in (7.04 m)
   
   
   
   
  
• Wingspan: 34 ft 0 in (10.36 m)
   
   
   
   
  
• Height: 9 ft 0¾ in (2.76 m)
   
   
   
   
  
• Wing area: 124.7 ft² (11.59 m²)
   
   
   
   
  
• Airfoil: NASA GAW-1
   
   
   
   
  
• Empty weight: 1,128 lb (512 kg)
   
   
   
   
  
• Max. takeoff weight: 1,670 lb (757 kg)
   
   
   
   
  
• Engine: Avco Lycoming O-235-L2C air-cooled flat-four piston engine, 112 hp (83.5 kW)
   
  Performance
   
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

• Never exceed speed: 159 mph (138 knots, 256 km/h)
   
   
   
   
  
• Maximum speed: 126 mph (109 knots, 202 km/h) at sea level
   
   
   
   
  
• Cruise speed: 115 mph (100 knots, 185 km/h) at 10,500 ft (3,200 m) (65% power)
   
   
   
   
  
• Stall speed: 56.5 mph (49 knots, 91 km/h) (IAS), flaps down
   
   
   
   
  
• Range: 539 miles (468 nmi, 867 km) at 10,500 ft (3,200 m), (65% power)
   
   
   
   
  
• Service ceiling: 13,000 ft (4,000 m)
   
   
   
   
  
• Rate of climb: 718 ft/min (3.65 m/s)
   
   
   
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

[djpacro]

Which Bellanca?

 

 

[facthunter]

If you are in a spin below about 1500 ft you are unlikely to recover it in the height available, unless you have already initiated it, using most common methods . Avoiding the need to is the best solution any time but particularly at low height, where the penalty is more certain. The inner wing has to be more stalled than the outer but how did it get stalled? That is where the big discussion begins. but here's a clue. Unless the plane is loaded wrong, the Pilot did it. Nev

 

 

[kaz3g]

Which Bellanca?

I did my aeros including spins with Sharpie in 8KCAB VH-BIK IN THE MID-80's. You would remember it well.

 

Kaz

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Spinning is a requirement for your yearly check for gliding. I reckon its a good idea for power pilots to have at least a few glider flights and maybe do a spin there. Most power pilots at Gawler who have tried a glider flight say it was fun and they learned a lot.

 

Well sorry if this reads like a sales pitch... I hasten to say I don't get any money from selling glider flights.

 

 

[DWF]

I flew and instructed in Tomahawks 20 or more years ago (~140 hours).

 

The thing I remember most (apart from its' lack of performance) was the fact that the airframe would start shaking alarmingly approaching the stall (due, I think to the T tail) so there was never much doubt about what was happening.

 

Never did spin it though

 

DWF

 

 

[Roundsounds]

spin awareness training is a must for all pilots, it's in the syllabus for both GA and RAA. How it's delivered is the variable, whether that be a discussion or actual spin recovery training.

 

In my opinion, the best way to provide useful spin awareness training in an appropriate aircraft type by duly qualified instructor.

 

 

[djpacro]

 

 

 

[pmccarthy]

My training included spins to three rotations .. I did a lot solo for fun. Early 1970s. It keeps me alert even today to fly balanced. I would love to do more of that training now. Will do it if I find an opportunity.

 

 

[old man emu]

My training in a C-150 only went as far as incipient spins and recovery from that point. However, I believe there is a world of difference in one's ability to recover from an incipient spin at 3000 ft in the training area when the purpose of the exercise is to deliberately practise early recovery from spins, and recovery from an unexpected spin entry. Just compare the mental process differences between approaching and stopping a car at a Stop sign, and stopping a car because a tree has just fallen across the road in front of you.

 

Perhaps, instead of giving low-time pilots training in recovery from incipient spins, they should be taken to altitude and shown what happens when you try to turn 180 degrees from a low speed, climbing attitude with little or no power. Isn't that the most common scenario of stall-spin crashes after an EFATO ?

 

OME

 

 

[pmccarthy]

Yes, a good idea, but has to be done in an aerobatic aircraft.

 

 

[kasper]

Not sure why stall terrify people - they are all part of flying and IMHO you need to know the signs and recovery as a student and as a pilot of the aircraft you are flying regularly - the first thing I do in a new type is get get whoever is letting me fly their aircraft up at altitude and fly from cruise back down to stall through the config changes for a std pattern - I want to know what THIS plane is like as it slows down ... particularly if its a homebuilt - a little misrigging on a control surface or a slightly off wings section at a critical place and you can get behavior that I want to know about well before getting into an actual circuit with actual terra firma 1000ft below.

 

As an RAA student/pilot/instructor full stall and incipient spin training received and given in RAA LSA55 Jabs, drifter, GT500 etc - all only incipient on spin and recognition but full recovery from stalls in all configs and in turns BOTH directions as well as straight and level.

 

And on top actual spin training as part of GA aero on 7GCBC citabria - reinforces the need to be aware of the approach and standard recovery ... and might explain why in my engine outs I have always managed to overcome the turn-back instinct and landed ahead - always remembered Harry my instructor being very clear about EFATO - lower speed impact under control (in front of you) is ALWAYS preferred to being under less control low airspeed higher ground/impact speed IF you get the thing turned around before impact ...

 

 

[johnm]

good point Kasper .............. on reflection most will stall their planes at least once every flight

 

 

[Bandit12]

Let’s start back in the days when GA had the Piper Tomahawk which came into Australia around 1975.....

Now what is so very interesting is that this beastie was a widow maker and spun at the drop of a hat......

 

Some comments below from guys who flew the tomahawk back in the day!

 

1. The Tomahawk was changed structurally so much between it;s certification flight tests and production, that the Piper Engineers and Test Pilots said it is NOT THE AIRPLANE WHICH WAS CERTITIFED !. Piper had modified the wing after and made it more flexible.
    
   2. Spin recovery is extremely difficult. In the context of a approach stall/spin recovery it IS impossible.
    
    
   

 

 

3. The accident record of the Tomahawk as a trainer was appalling, and the industry that buys them ran the other way screaming. Many airplanes today are placarded against spinning, including the Bellanca which has been used successfully in airshow routines. Nobody in his right mind would want to get anywhere the limits in the tomahawk .

I didn't learn back in the day, being only a relative newcomer from the early 2000s. But I did fly a Tomahawk up to GFPT, then later for NVFR and just for fun. I didn't find it to be scary at all or difficult to recover, although incipient spins were all that was allowed. It certainly didn't spin at the drop of a hat, but it did have quite a pronounced wing drop at stall. Accelerated spins in a Pitts S2B were much more of an eye opener. Agree though that spin training should be mandatory.

 

 

[old man emu]

always remembered Harry my instructor being very clear about EFATO - lower speed impact under control (in front of you) is ALWAYS preferred to being under less control low airspeed higher ground/impact speed

Another stating of the adage: "Fly the plane as far into the crash as you can."

 

You have to remember that if a plane stalls a 50 kts in still air, it is travelling at a ground speed of 92 kph. Imagine the damage to you if you came off a motorcycle and into the scrub at that speed. By the very need to build planes as light as practicable, they don't offer much protection against the intrusion of tree limbs and other things that are present between the sky and the ground.

 

Obviously, if on take off you have a 10 kt headwind, your ground speed is 40 kts (74 kph), but if you manage a 180 turn, your ground speed is 60 kts (111 kph).

 

Since the kinetic energy of a body in motion = 1/2 * mv^2, keeping the mass of the plane the same, 1/2*m = a constant (k), then the energy = k*v^2

 

Now, metres per second = kph /3.6. So 74 kph = 20.55; 92 kph = 25.5, and 111kph = 30.8

 

The kinetic energy at 40 kts = 422.3k; @ 50 kts = 650.25k, and at 60 kts = 948.6k.

 

For an in groundspeed of 10 kts either way, you are changing your enegry content by a factor of 200!

 

OME

 

 

[SSCBD]

I didn't learn back in the day, being only a relative newcomer from the early 2000s. But I did fly a Tomahawk up to GFPT, then later for NVFR and just for fun. I didn't find it to be scary at all or difficult to recover, although incipient spins were all that was allowed. It certainly didn't spin at the drop of a hat, but it did have quite a pronounced wing drop at stall. Accelerated spins in a Pitts S2B were much more of an eye opener. Agree though that spin training should be mandatory.

They have modified the wing since then. Pitts are fun. But you get the background of what is a problem and should be addressed.

 

 

[farri]

I flew and instructed in Tomahawks 20 or more years ago (~140 hours).

The thing I remember most (apart from its' lack of performance) was the fact that the airframe would start shaking alarmingly approaching the stall (due, I think to the T tail) so there was never much doubt about what was happening.DWF

Much like the Zenith 701 I flew when it was based here! The flat, fuselage side panel`s, would start rattling well before the stall.

 

 

 

Frank,

 

Ps, I`ve done spin training in the Decathlon!

 

 

[Yenn]

Kasper. How I agree with you. The only way to get to know a new aeroplane is to fly it at all speeds, but as you are going to have to land it you need to get those slow speeds sorted out. I have done first flights of new aeroplnes and I will go to 3000' or more and just slow it down, clean and flapped. That way I know what the landing has to be like.

 

 

[facthunter]

You should not be SCARED of a stall. It's very easy to get out of it. I like the new part 61 recommendations. At last we see use of power and the aircraft's energy actually spelled out as required knowledge.. Nev

 

 

[kasper]

Kasper. How I agree with you. The only way to get to know a new aeroplane is to fly it at all speeds, but as you are going to have to land it you need to get those slow speeds sorted out. I have done first flights of new aeroplnes and I will go to 3000' or more and just slow it down, clean and flapped. That way I know what the landing has to be like.

I too have done first flights of aircraft for builders ... and fortunately only once have I wished I was on the ground looking up and not in the plane wishing I was high enough to use the chute strapped to me.

... fortunately for that one time all I could do was keep going up till I had the option of using the chute and by then I had worked through the problems (all my own making I will add) and then get back to the checking out the handling at speeds/etc for the circuit ... so I am fortunate to say I have only even used a chute when I go into the plane as a jumper and not when I entered as the pilot

 

 

[Yenn]

The only time I was ever apprehensive in a plane was when I was sitting on the floor beside the pilot in a C172, with no seat belt going for my first parachute jump. Low cloud meant I also had to come back own in the plane.

 

 

[Neil_S]

Agree that learning how to recover from spinning should be part of the syllabus. Simply saying don't get into a spin in an RAAus aircraft is not enough.

 

I did an hour's spin recovery training in an Aerobat while on holiday in New Zealand with an instructor who was in total agreement.

 

After doing the theory the first spin & recover was done by him so I could simply see how it felt, the next one was him with me hands (and feet) on the controls, then the next four were entirely by me, with both incipient and full spins.

 

Although an hour is not very long I certainly feel a lot more confident that I would at least have a chance of recovering IF I mishandled my plane enough to get into a spin AND had enough height.

 

Cheers,

 

Neil

 

 

[facthunter]

Well that is the issue with spins. The height needed to recover. Rapid and positive stall recovery is far more beneficial, and there is a chance to do that now. I've been doing it nearly all my flying life, but unable to implement the procedure in the field, as an instructional technique, in RAAus. The situation in RAAus is apparently still not clarified although in the past there is frequent reference to being able to refer to the GA syllabus. Nothing there would over ride the limitations put on RAAus aircraft eg no aerobatic manoeuvers, etc, in which case one would expect some definition of these as applies currently, just to make the position clear. Nev

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Although an hour is not very long I certainly feel a lot more confident that I would at least have a chance of recovering IF I mishandled my plane enough to get into a spin AND had enough height

The key is to recognise the early signs of an impending spin and take action to avoid entry. The typical unintentional spin will occur at a height where recovery cannot be made. Unless you're going to do aerobatics spin recovery training is not really of much use, however a keen awareness of what an impending spin looks/feels like and what to do to fix the situation is critical for all pilots. To develop the awareness of what an impending spin entry looks like requires actual spin entry, the instructor needs to place emphasis on this phase, not necessarily the recovery. Having said that, might as well get the trainee to do the recovery.

 

 

[Yenn]

If you don't get spin training I would suggest slow flying and keep the wings level with rudder. Whenever you are slow get ready to use that rudder to pick up a wing, especially on finals.