Spin Training

[Geoff13]

I have started a new thread on this as I think to further the discussion on the thread that it is currently being discussed on is inappropriate. But this is obviously a topic that does require further discussion.

 

I read in several forums here about the need for spin training.

 

Now within RAA are aircraft are neither approved to spin nor probably in most cases tested for it.

 

In the normal day to day flying that we as RAA Certificate holders do why is there a need for spin training.

 

It is unlikely that I would have completed my training if there was a requirement to spin.

 

I do no go on amusement rides that can turn me upside down and as such would not go on a joyflight that could do the same. In fact I have never been in an aircraft that can do aerobatics and am not likely to do so.

 

So is the "perceived" requirement to learn to spin/recover based on the possibility that I may one day inadvertently enter into a spin in an aircraft not suited to it nor tested to it. If that is the case is there some huge hole in my training that could allow me to do something I am not ready for, or is it only likely to happen if I start pushing the envelope.

 

This may seem obvious to some, but to me it seems totally contradictory.

 

 

[robinsm]

I think the main value in spin training, and any training in recovery from unusual attitudes would be the confidence for the trainee in their abilities, and the knowledge that, if they ever got into strife in the air, they had the knowledge, and confidence to right the situation if at all possible. Hopefully that would never happen, but confidence in the aircraft and your abilities is a major advantage when flying in other than perfect conditions.

 

 

[scre80]

GFA can provide this. I have been up twice in a glider to do the spins and unusual attitudes training, well worth it as I can not do it in raaus.

 

Contact your local gliding club to see if they can do it. I did mine at the Adelaide Soaring Club.

 

 

[djpacro]

.....I read in several forums here about the need for spin training....

I see many calls for RAA instructors to require spin training, the same as GA instructors, which seems very sensible to me.

 

...It is unlikely that I would have completed my training if there was a requirement to spin.I do no go on amusement rides that can turn me upside down and as such would not go on a joyflight that could do the same. In fact I have never been in an aircraft that can do aerobatics and am not likely to do so....

Agreed. When I learnt to fly I disliked stalls and my instructor offered to demonstrate spins and I declined.

 

... If that is the case is there some huge hole in my training that could allow me to do something I am not ready for, or is it only likely to happen if I start pushing the envelope....

CASA's new Part 61 a few years ago expanded on the stall exercises so if any student pilot is not getting the full set then they have such a hole. These exercises can quite easily result in an inadvertent spin so the instructor requires those skills above.A short upset recovery course would improve a pilot's awareness, skills and confidence - no need for spin training however it should include stalls in skidded turns which, if correct and prompt action is not taken, will result in an aggressive spin entry.

 

Too many engine failures result in a stall, spin, crash, die .... it shouldn't be that way.

 

 

[SDQDI]

I personally think that all instructors should have done spin training. When teaching dumb students like me stalls it is very obvious to me that it wouldn't take a lot of effort for said student to inadvertently react wrong and be right at a spins door, having an instructor trained to deal with that if things go south seems wise to me!

 

As for individuals I am generally against mandating extra trading requirements but I am all for encouraging ALL pilots to continue further training to maintain/increase their skill set. I haven't done spin training but it certainly is on my list of "to do's" alongside finish off my ll endo. Actually spin, Low level and recovery from unusual attitudes seem like very wise tools to have under our belts and certainly wouldn't hurt to have them when things go south.

 

I don't know how we can encourage people to do them, obviously financial incentives would be helpful but money doesn't just happen so that isn't really an option.

 

 

[spacesailor]

From merely an observation, my aircraft is known to spin on the stall, (drops a wing).

 

Problem is it's mainly on the landing stage at very low altitude, therefor spin recovery at under two-hundred feet would appear useless.

 

Could I be wrong?.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

I'm a firm supporter of spin training for everyone but it doesn't necessarily have to be done during ab initio.

 

I don't think you can beat learning it in gliders, IMHO, and a few glider flights also give the advantage of learning more about engine-out techniques.

 

A good instructor will introduce the spin progressively, so that if you start out very uncomfortable with it, as I did, after four or five you get used to it and a couple more and suddenly it's no longer a problem.

 

After that I spent years teaching them ... can't say I've ever come to enjoy them as some do, but I revel in the knowledge that I know how to avoid them by being able to recognize the earliest signs and can think and respond well during the incipient and fully developed stages.

 

BTW - many people are uncomfortable because they disliked the incipient demo and/or training which is, in my mind, far more unsettling than the fully developed stage, which is a stable condition regardless that the world seems to be spinning around ...

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

From merely an observation, my aircraft is known to spin on the stall, (drops a wing).Problem is it's mainly on the landing stage at very low altitude, therefor spin recovery at under two-hundred feet would appear useless.

Could I be wrong?.

 

spacesailor

The Hummelbird was very influential in an early design I built in 1980s so I studied its characteristics quite extensively.

 

I'm surprised it has a tendency to drop a wing at the stall. Being a 'Hershey bar' wing planform (constant chord - not tapered) it shouldn't tip-stall even if it didn't have any built-in geometric washout.

 

Is it possible that it's not rigged correctly? A few years ago I helped someone re-jig the centre section of a 601HD where there was an inadvertent built-in twist which caused one wing to stall first.

 

Another possibility is arriving at the stall while yawed - I had a student that used to press a pedal when approaching a stall, they weren't aware that they were doing it ...

 

 

[Nightmare]

I agree with the majority here, I think this training would be very beneficial, to save our life, our passenger if we have one on board, and anyone or thing below us in the path, if we inadvertently get ourselves into a spin. The benefit of this type of training would make our correcting actions automatic.

 

The closest we get in our current training is the stall and wing drop recovery. But as our training and theory suggests, if these are not addressed quickly, they can turn into fully developed spins of which we are not trained to deal with, other than applying what we do for a stall and/or wing drop.

 

 

[MartyG]

I have started a new thread on this as I think to further the discussion on the thread that it is currently being discussed on is inappropriate. But this is obviously a topic that does require further discussion.I read in several forums here about the need for spin training.

 

Now within RAA are aircraft are neither approved to spin nor probably in most cases tested for it.

 

In the normal day to day flying that we as RAA Certificate holders do why is there a need for spin training.

 

It is unlikely that I would have completed my training if there was a requirement to spin.

 

I do no go on amusement rides that can turn me upside down and as such would not go on a joyflight that could do the same. In fact I have never been in an aircraft that can do aerobatics and am not likely to do so.

 

So is the "perceived" requirement to learn to spin/recover based on the possibility that I may one day inadvertently enter into a spin in an aircraft not suited to it nor tested to it.

Geoff I fully understand some not having any desire to ever spin an Aircraft either on purpose or inadvertantly but as is always the case when the Human element is involved mistakes can happen. With the correct training and good airmanship no one should ever accidently get into a spin but as we all know mistakes can & will always happen. My concern is that someone who has never been in a Spin and then Accidently gets into a inadvertant spln situation and finds the nose pointing at the ground will do what most would do in panic and haul back on the stick which could be fatal. Back in 86 I did a type rating for the Victor Airtourer & one of the requirements was compulsory 2 turn spin recoveries, After the Instructor did the first one and my brain recovered from a state of utter confusion/fear/relief I was on the verge of saying take me home please when I heard the crazy words of now YOU do one. Well I did(Stupid male ego wouldnt let me say I wanna go home LOL) & now that crazy stuff amuses no end. Wether spin training should be made compulsory or not I dont know but to me I see benefits in case the worst happens. My 2 cents.Cheers

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

I agree with the majority here, I think this training would be very beneficial, to save our life, our passenger if we have one on board, and anyone or thing below us in the path, if we inadvertently get ourselves into a spin. The benefit of this type of training would make our correcting actions automatic.The closest we get in our current training is the stall and wing drop recovery. But as our training and theory suggests, if these are not addressed quickly, they can turn into fully developed spins of which we are not trained to deal with, other than applying what we do for a stall and/or wing drop.

Yes ... and what you do for the stall and/or wing drop is also the correct procedure for a fully developed spin i.e. unstall the wing BUT ... as you suggest ... without having experienced and being reasonably comfortable with the nose pointed steeply down and looking at a rapidly revolving ground it's second nature to try to haul the nose up. Only by training - by having actually been there and tamed the fear and mastered the required technique, can one reliably ensure a safe outcome.

 

 

[Tucano]

BTW - many people are uncomfortable because they disliked the incipient demo and/or training which is, in my mind, far more unsettling than the fully developed stage, which is a stable condition regardless that the world seems to be spinning around ...

Spin training is all about building confidence, it helps with the overcoming shock of having the aircraft entering the incipient phase in a stall plus drilling the reaction required to exit that error - for me flying needs a planning or training to overcome fear and to create the necessary automatic responses in an emergency. I will personally vouch for this having lived through a bad landing accident that once the OMG moment passed [ie "this is not a drill'] looked back into the cockpit to see the stick jammed in my belly, full opposite rudder and my hand pulling the throttle closed. The aircraft picked up the port wing and then just dropped on the ground in a three point position perpendicular to the runway center, motor idling - there was NO conscious decision, it just happened.

 

This was a product of doing incipient and spins with my first instructor until I believed I could handle the situation. I agree a stable spin in a lot more comfortable than deliberty dropping a wing in a stall unless the door blow open in that spin - story when I am drunk enough.

 

There is no substitute for beign drilled and drilled and confronting the thing you fear, remembering fear is controlled panic where the fear keeps you safe and the training allows you to control panic.

 

All aircraft will drop a wing and not to exposing all pilots to it is just sticking heads into the sand and as the aircraft that fly in the sports category change in performance it could be a nasty shock for someone told that spins are not an issue in this class of aircraft.

 

Hope this makes some sence

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Spin recovery training is only useful for pilots completing an aerobatic endorsement. Should a non aerobatic pilot inadvertently enter a spin, they will have little chance of recovering. Having said that, spin awareness training is a must - all pilots should learn the likely causes of inadvertent spin entry and taken to that point just prior to entry and taught to recover at that point. The most common stall / spin accidents occur in the circuit and usually below 1000' AGL, a competent aerobatic pilot would be doing well to recover from that height let alone a non aerobatic pilot. Slow flight / stall recovery training is generally very poorly taught in current flight training.

 

 

[robinsm]

Spin recovery training is only useful for pilots completing an aerobatic endorsement. Should a non aerobatic pilot inadvertently enter a spin, they will have little chance of recovering. Having said that, spin awareness training is a must - all pilots should learn the likely causes of inadvertent spin entry and taken to that point just prior to entry and taught to recover at that point. The most common stall / spin accidents occur in the circuit and usually below 1000' AGL, a competent aerobatic pilot would be doing well to recover from that height let alone a non aerobatic pilot. Slow flight / stall recovery training is generally very poorly taught in current flight training.

Spin recovery training is only useful for pilots completing an aerobatic endorsement. Should a non aerobatic pilot inadvertently enter a spin, they will have little chance of recovering. Having said that, spin awareness training is a must - all pilots should learn the likely causes of inadvertent spin entry and taken to that point just prior to entry and taught to recover at that point. The most common stall / spin accidents occur in the circuit and usually below 1000' AGL, a competent aerobatic pilot would be doing well to recover from that height let alone a non aerobatic pilot. Slow flight / stall recovery training is generally very poorly taught in current flight training.

The first sentence of Roundsounds post is insulting and not very helpful to most pilots.. If a non aerobatic pilot enters a spin, and has had exposure to the spin recovery procedure then, given the correct altitude, recovery would surely be possible. Are you advocating no training so pilots wont have a clue if it happens, not a very happy attitude. I would have thought that the more knowledge and practical training a pilot has, the better that pilot will be if anything untoward happens.

 

 

[MJW]

Have to agree with you there robinsm. I think of todays kids learning to drive. No they should not get into a situation where the car is in a slide on a wet roundabout because they entered to fast. But they do. Should they all be made drive on a Skidpan to understand what it feels like and how to react. Sometimes i do. Spin training the same? When i was doing my PPL with Lester the Tester at Sunshine Coast Aircharter in 84, it was demonstrated within the first few hours. Loved it in old 172. Still clearly remember the day " under the hood" on limited panel doing unusual attitudes. Do Raa students need similar kind of training for that once in a flying lifetime moment they might need it. It costs more money, an approved plane and rule changes.

 

Sometimes i do!

 

 

[Roundsounds]

The first sentence of Roundsounds post is insulting and not very helpful to most pilots.. If a non aerobatic pilot enters a spin, and has had exposure to the spin recovery procedure then, given the correct altitude, recovery would surely be possible. Are you advocating no training so pilots wont have a clue if it happens, not a very happy attitude. I would have thought that the more knowledge and practical training a pilot has, the better that pilot will be if anything untoward happens.

I'm sorry you find my statement insulting, but it is based on many years of experience training pilots and reviewing accident investigations. I cannot recall an unintentional stall / spin accident from a height that would allow recovery by the average non aerobatic endorsed pilot. The hands off spin recovery technique is nothing more than a cool party trick, it has no practical application for the average pilot. The incidence involving stall / spin accidents can be reduced significantly by proper stall /spin recognition / recovery training, this does not need to include developed spins.

 

 

[Tucano]

Should a non aerobatic pilot inadvertently enter a spin, they will have little chance of recovering.

I agree about spinning and low altitude but practicing incipient and spins drills a response / plan into low end pilots like myself. More importantly is about rudder control at slow speed were its becomes a natural part of the flying. I was at a club when one of the best instructors I knew came back in quite mode - flight review in a Mooney with a 5000 hour plus pilot just doing a stall but the wing dropped = full aileron = flat spin = seeing leaves at a high level of detail.

 

That rudder drilling I received save my dumb ass with a aircraft 40 feet off the deck - one wing heading for the ground and no time to think. This will become an issue as the aircraft on the RAA register move up the performance pole - forget spinning just try to obtain a retractable / constant speed endorsement in this category. If an aircraft can spin the owner should be able to engage a qualified instructor to guide them for training in their new aircraft at the edge of slow of slow flight, there is a lot of difference between aerobatics and just spinning.

 

A lot of pilots fear the wing drop and avoid practice once they obtain a certificate as it will never happen in this class of aircraft.

 

Again hope this make sence

 

 

[djpacro]

An interesting table from the Sunshine Coast Aero Club showing elements of a pilot certificate course to consider including optional spin training at https://www.sunshinecoastaeroclub.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Flight-Training-RPC-Course-Comparison.pdf

 

(I hope they don't run afoul of CASA's new definition of aerobatics. The list is missing a few elements of Part 61 stalls but included an important one which is not in Part 61.)

 

 

[facthunter]

Most people getting into an inadvertent spin in the circuit will die. One reason for that is they will react instinctively and try to lift the downside wing with aileron and if the nose drops they will pull the stick back as well. Perfect situation to go straight into a spin. Probably over 9 out of 10 will do this, unless they have recently been schooled and/or practised incipient spin recovery.. It usually happens turning onto final when you have overshot the runway centre line and pull it too tight and apply top rudder

 

Also any time you have the nose pointing down near vertical and don't have say 500 ft (depend s on the plane) you won't pull out before you hit the ground (hard).

 

Obviously AVOIDING getting into these situations is the best thing to do since you cannot guarantee getting out of them at low level.

 

A spinning aircraft has a certain ROD once it's in an established spin. In the Chipmunk it's about 6,000 fpm VERTICAL speed. Over 60 MPH/ 100 kms/h, DOWN. The planes attitude may be 20 degrees nose down but the ROD is enough to kill you.

 

Some other aircraft will have a lower ROD. The DH 82 Tiger Moth is often survivable in a spin situation if it spins into the ground but you still could be injured.

 

Knowing a lot about spinning won't cause you to get into one accidently. I would suggest the opposite is the case.

 

If a plane goes inverted, in some situation, It could be a vortex from a heavy that passed 6 minutes ago or a willy willy, let's face it most people will just about $#1t themselves and will generally not respond in the best way. A 3 axis aeroplane flies whether it's right way up or not so It's logical to do practice that gets rid of the fear of the situation and allows you to input the plane, regain and keep it controlled, fly it out of the situation This is not aerobatics. Don't confuse the two.

 

A plane doesn't travel on rails. It's free to move in all axis. (even a Jumbo is). Your job is to be able to fly safely in all situations you may encounter or you are just counting on luck to see you through. Nev

 

 

[Akromaster]

Should a non aerobatic pilot inadvertently enter a spin, they will have little chance of recovering.

In the context I think we're discussing this, which is low altitude inadvertent spin, I would agree that most people wouldn't react correctly quick enough. It's a very short period of time to apply the correct response with not much height before something happens. For most of us, I would suspect just wouldn't respond [correctly] in time. It reminds me of a documentary I saw some time ago about firefighter training. They pitted an untrained host versus a firefighter to control a fire in a room and it was obvious that even with "some" training, the muscle memory from the drilled firefighter was well advance of the host. Like most things, unless you're doing it all the time (like a competition aerobatic pilot) your reaction time will never be optimal and so the emphasis on training to avoid it in the first place is the right one.

 

This isn't the exact reference, but here's an article that talks about the firefighting repetition training:

 

Why firefighter training depends on repetition

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

Most people getting into an inadvertent spin in the circuit will die. One reason for that is they will react instinctively and try to lift the downside wing with aileron and if the nose drops they will pull the stick back as well. Perfect situation to go straight into a spin. Probably over 9 out of 10 will do this, unless they have recently been schooled and/or practised incipient spin recovery.. It usually happens turning onto final when you have overshot the runway centre line and pull it too tight and apply top rudder ..... Nev

Didn't you mean bottom rudder?

 

"Pulled too tight" (steeply banked?) and then applying top rudder would put you into a slip which is anti-spin, whereas an overshot centreline with reluctance to bank sufficiently and trying to 'rudder it around' with bottom rudder produces the skid which is pro-spin and is the deadly culprit that results in the all-too-regular final turn stall-spin scenario.

 

 

[facthunter]

Yes, Rudder to tighten is the bad thing. Typing too fast. Nev

 

 

[peter]

the best thing about spin training is seeing the rate of descent, how fast it can develop in a steep turn, and because of that experience it has made me fly the last part of my circuits so much more carefully. It has also made me recognise a lot quicker just what my plane is trying to tell me. I believe that at least in my own plane I recognise the onset of stalls much quicker because I have flown it a lot more in and around the stall and that is a direct result of the aerobatic endorsement.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Didn't you mean bottom rudder?"Pulled too tight" (steeply banked?) and then applying top rudder would put you into a slip which is anti-spin, whereas an overshot centreline with reluctance to bank sufficiently and trying to 'rudder it around' with bottom rudder produces the skid which is pro-spin and is the deadly culprit that results in the all-too-regular final turn stall-spin scenario.

Another poorly taught fact in training, stall speed increases with load factor. Increase in bank angle doesn't always mean increase in stall speed - don't pull (increase load factor) and stall speed won't increase, but your rate of descent will!

 

Poorly trained pilots will use shallow bank angles turning final to avoid stalling (I see this a lot during glide approaches). Then they use a boot full of rudder to "help" it around the turn, the yaw creates a roll which is then held off with aileron, drag increases, speed decreases, the aircraft gets nose heavy, pilot holds nose up.... flick, spin, crash and burn. All of the symptoms are there if you're aware of and looking for them. Under some circumstances a steeper banked turn is appropriate - much higher turn rate can compensate for the increased rate of descent, just don't let it get slow or load it up too much.

 

It's all about training and exploring the slow speed handling of each aircraft under safe conditions - safe height with an appropriately experienced person.

 

 

[turboplanner]

the best thing about spin training is seeing the rate of descent, how fast it can develop in a steep turn, and because of that experience it has made me fly the last part of my circuits so much more carefully. It has also made me recognise a lot quicker just what my plane is trying to tell me. I believe that at least in my own plane I recognise the onset of stalls much quicker because I have flown it a lot more in and around the stall and that is a direct result of the aerobatic endorsement.

Even without spin training, knowing the most likely point for a spin in casual flying is the turn from Base to Final, you can avoid almost all of this risk by flying a generous downwind leg, taking care to turn base so you have a reasonable final to correct mistakes on, and, if you do overrun the base/final turn, carefully correcting it on your run down rather than panicing at the turn. You can pre-programme your mind for this.

Another area you can very substantially reduce the spin risk is adopting Rate 1 turns at 15 degrees and Rate 2 at 30 degrees instead of not knowing where those angles are used and yanking the aircraft into a 60 degree turn every time you turn.