Spin Training

[red750]

I heard recently a Mustang pilot say that the Mustang takes 9000 ft to recover from a stall spin.

I witnessed a Mustang spiral into the ground from low altitude. I was present at the opening of Bendigo Airport in Feb 1970, where the headline act at the airshow was a lowlevel pass in a Mustang, owned and flown by Don Busch. He made two low passes over the field, and was requested by the air traffic controller to make an unscheduled third pass. While making the turn to come back for the pass, at 1500ft, the plane dropped a wing and spiralled behind the trees before a black cloud of smoke rose into the air. Here is a copy of the ATSB report: https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/24581/197002554.pdf

 

Comments on the wrinkled plum suggest that he may have had a full fuselage tank (behind the seat), which put the C of G too far after for the manouvre. He only had about 25 hours experience on the aircraft, mostly in travel flights.

 

 

[frank marriott]

One thing that seems to stand out in these discussions is that spins seem to happen from over banking or over use of rudder, while keeping a low bank angle.This points to me that what is really needed is proper use of rudder. Something that seems not to be taught nowadays. I have watched pilots who seem to have no idea of what the rudder is for and absolutely zero idea of slipping a plane. The other thing that seems to be lacking is the ability to control the descent rate properly

on final.

One thing that comes to my mind was the statement of an individual who regularly referred to "kicking it around with rudder" and would dismiss any comments to the contrary. Sadly he is no longer with us but despite witnesses and a video of the incident the RAA investigators could not give an opinion as to what happened. It will be interesting to hear the coroner's findings are - not yet held.

 

 

[facthunter]

Red . That crash was due to high angle of attack "P" force on the propeller with assymetric thrust due varying angle of attack of blades one side of the prop to the other. At low speeds the plane will roll against the full aileron and rudder with high power set. Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

I suspect that is exactly what IS happening. Most are trained not go near the edge of the envelope and get bitten severely when the do it inadvertently.

True. How are we supposed to know where the edge of that envelope is? By reference to an ASI which can easily be misleading? A lot of us may have been severely close to that ragged edge without knowing it.

 

 

[facthunter]

Early in your training you do Straight and L Boring eh!, but you should have taken the plane from fastest cruise all the way back to slow (clean) holding the plane at a constant height and trimming to hands off all the way. .At the slower end you would have been advised to note things like lighter control feel ,lower airspeed noise and lack of control effectiveness, higher nose attitude and stick position changing with trim change with the stick being well forward at high speed and well back at low speed. and the trim operating to follow the stick. You would have been told to firmly hold the pitch where you wanted it with the stick and ease the pressure with trim as the speed dropped back to where you would stabilise it. In level flight you control the planes speed with power. Your power setting determines the speed you will stabilise at.

 

You would also later have been told to not trim in a turn, but consciously hold pressure and ease when you are coming out of the turn and you will still be trimmed to the entry speed.. Extra Power should be added in anything like a LEVEL steep turn or your speed will decay, and you actually want a speed increase in a steep turn, to maintain a safe stall margin.

 

Power change may also cause a pitch change, (ignoring the effect of speed change) which you must manage, so there's a few things to cover and reinforce as you progress.

 

Slower speed, stick further back to increase angle of attack to provide enough lift to support the plane at the slower speed .. YOU are managing the angle of attack of the wing with the elevator. If the angle gets too great you have gone too far. The wing stalls at an ANGLE to the RELATIVE airflow, not a speed. You then have lots of drag and not much lift and the nose will drop with some buffeting just before the stall.. Plenty of clues there if you use them. You CAN fly without an ASI. Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...Plenty of clues there if you use them. You CAN fly without an ASI. Nev

Quite true, Nev. I've flown quite safely with a dud ASI, having long since gotten the "feel" of my plane.

The most critical instrument might then be the slip ball. Mine was made for me by my teenage daughter and has given many years of reliable service.

 

Early in your training...

That's the problem, Nev. For many of us, those lessons were decades ago. Perhaps our training system assumes they were well learned and that good habits became ingrained. Over the years since, we all develop our own styles; some good, some not so. Flying by yourself you've got nobody to give you useful feedback. Flying with a passenger might be no better; even a fellow pilot may be too diplomatic to point out bad habits you've gotten into.

I look forward to my BFRs as an opportunity to fly a totally different aircraft with a new instructor. Too often I've found it a quick box-ticking exercise. A BFR should be no less rigorous than the original pre-solo checkout.

 

 

[SSCBD]

f

 

Perhaps if there was less focus on flying the fastest shiniest thing out there, they might find other stuff more affordable....you can do an upset recovery course (GA Aerobatic instructors and aircraft) for way less than the cost of the XC cert, but what do they all do?You won't come out it with an endorsement, but you will be wiser.

I have heard a few instructors say "the key to a good landing is a good stable approach", then I read an article by a bush pilot with many thousands of hours, who claimed that the key was "to make a good landing from any approach". (obviously there are times you should just go around) The things have have improved my skills the most have involved practising just that at private airstrips and some LL training, which greatly improves your competence close to the ground, something that you will need on your first engine failure.

 

Regardless, whether it was a spin or just energy mismanagement after an engine failure, we seem to see a few (after engine failure) of these that impacted with little forward momentum and considerable vertical energy, and I may be wrong, but that pilots are not being taught to be competent at handling the aircraft close to the ground, and things go bad when it is forced upon them for the first time.

 

The usual comment in the AUF "crash comics" after engine failure used to be "uneventful forced landing carried out", figure out what has changed....

Faster, heavier, more slippery, compared to the OLD auf days, and lack of what I call a lack of teaching precision circuits and is the picture looking right on finals and constant airspeed control. Add a few knots on gusty days. YOU try landing a drifter engine out in a paddock two up compared to a fully loaded 600kg sling 2 or BRM etc ! Lets see who walks away without any problem and damage.

We are mini GA now.

 

 

[Yenn]

Somebody here mentioned angle of attack being critical and I agree with that. They also said that it was dependent upom the angle of the stick, which I also agree with. What I don't understand is how can I know what the stick location is. I have flown several different aircraft over a few years and one of those for 15 plus years, but I still cannot tell where the stick is accurately enough to say when the stall will occur. I have always enjoyed slow flight, just waffling along with the nose in the air and feeling what is happening, but stick position is just beyond my capabilities.

 

Can anyone else honestly say that they know exactly where to position the stick to be just above the stall?

 

 

[facthunter]

It will be the same in a repeat of the action (for YOUR plane) if you don't change other factors, like flap setting or CofG. It's not a concept where you make a mark on the side panel, or the floor to make use of it. Get you rawareness heightened whenever the stick is back a bit , same as you do it the airspeed is low. It's another aid/indication of where you are in the envelope. In a steep turn ,where you could do a calculation of stall speed for each bank angle ( Only valid for a LEVEL turn) and watch the airspeed.( In theory) you will in practice just add a ballpark amount for safety. (unless you have a reserve lift indicator that shows Angle of Attack) You are in the air, in a plane, not in a classroom doing a test . You are not fixating on your airspeed either. There's plenty of other things to watch in a steep turn. Nev

 

 

[M61A1]

SSCBD, While I agree with the content of your post, if that as really the issue we should be seeing overruns and obstacle impacts rather than stall/spin/pancakes.

 

In regard to "precision circuits", I routinely see people flying a "precise" circuit, as in the same every time, but miles away from the strip. I don't know how good the glide ratio of a Sling is, but I was in the circuit area the other day with one and they called "turning base" just as I was intending to do the same. After a bit of looking, I located them well out from the runway, and I suspect with no hope of ever making the runway in the event of a power failure.

 

 

[SDQDI]

Fully agree M6, I enjoy doing the 45degree join onto downwind but at times have found others on a downwind leg which is so far out that you can only just make out the runway let alone the windsock. I like to fly my downwind so I can see the runway and windsock very clearly and so I have enough time with an engine failure to maintain my downwind heading for 10-15 seconds and still make the runway easily.

 

 

[Oscar]

Somebody here mentioned angle of attack being critical and I agree with that. They also said that it was dependent upom the angle of the stick, which I also agree with. What I don't understand is how can I know what the stick location is. I have flown several different aircraft over a few years and one of those for 15 plus years, but I still cannot tell where the stick is accurately enough to say when the stall will occur. I have always enjoyed slow flight, just waffling along with the nose in the air and feeling what is happening, but stick position is just beyond my capabilities.Can anyone else honestly say that they know exactly where to position the stick to be just above the stall?

Yenn, stick position is not necessarily the be-all and end-all of stall control. As Nev, has indicated, it can be useful for YOUR aircraft - once discovered - but it doesn't translate to every aircraft.

 

For example, with about 50% power-on, in a Seabird Seeker you can fly around happily with the stick on the aft limit and 15 degrees of yaw at just above the stall speed FOR THAT POWER SETTING and turn on aileron and rudder as you wish, it was designed that way for its particular mission. I know, I've done it - and it felt weird to DO it, but the aerodynamics ( extremely clever application of VGs) unloads the elevators at just above the stall, so you can haul it back and putter along in complete confidence. The FAA chief test pilot who put the Seeker through its paces, reported back that it had 'possibly the most benign stall of any aircraft I have ever flown', and recommended to the FAA that they approach the guy who did the aerodynamics to instruct them in how to design the use of vg's to achieve that.

 

It's not that you don't have enough elevator power to actually stall a Seeker - it's that it has been fine-tuned so that the downwash off the wings plus the prop. blast at medium power combine to unload the elevators exactly enough to keep the thing flying happily. It took several years of development to get there! Amongst which, I believe something in the order of 120 spin-tests - some of which went to more than 90 degrees of bank....

 

 

[APenNameAndThatA]

Yenn, stick position is not necessarily the be-all and end-all of stall control. As Nev, has indicated, it can be useful for YOUR aircraft - once discovered - but it doesn't translate to every aircraft.For example, with about 50% power-on, in a Seabird Seeker you can fly around happily with the stick on the aft limit and 15 degrees of yaw at just above the stall speed FOR THAT POWER SETTING and turn on aileron and rudder as you wish, it was designed that way for its particular mission. I know, I've done it - and it felt weird to DO it, but the aerodynamics ( extremely clever application of VGs) unloads the elevators at just above the stall, so you can haul it back and putter along in complete confidence. The FAA chief test pilot who put the Seeker through its paces, reported back that it had 'possibly the most benign stall of any aircraft I have ever flown', and recommended to the FAA that they approach the guy who did the aerodynamics to instruct them in how to design the use of vg's to achieve that.

 

It's not that you don't have enough elevator power to actually stall a Seeker - it's that it has been fine-tuned so that the downwash off the wings plus the prop. blast at medium power combine to unload the elevators exactly enough to keep the thing flying happily. It took several years of development to get there! Amongst which, I believe something in the order of 120 spin-tests - some of which went to more than 90 degrees of bank....

That's remarkable. The plane has got some press (? Flying in the US) and that was not mentioned. Which is sad.

 

 

[Oscar]

APN: I flew SGO - the one in this video:

 

 

from the RHS, with the CASA test pilot and the guy who did the aerodynamics as the PIC. I am no experienced power pilot; my experience is almost exclusively gliders. I've had some 'interesting' moments in gliders.

 

We went out over Hervey Bay in SGO, and the PIC handed it over to me and told me to 'try it out'. Now, the last power aircraft I had tried, was a Cherokee 6, 20 years previously, taking off from a bush strip... I was not exactly good at it.

 

After I had done the clearing turn, I tried progressively to push it harder.. it was delightful to fly but my limits were evidently way below those of the thing. So after about 15 minutes, he took over and demonstrated what it could really do.

 

I have flown beside this guy for nearly 50 years - he's a family member - and I trust him. He doesn't grandstand. He's an ex-Glider Instructor, ex-Tuggie, and for a period, a DoT aircraft crash investigator. Never bent an aircraft.

 

If you've ever been in a car with a major Rallye driver on the dirt, you would know the sensation of mildly screaming to yourself 'OH SH1T, we're going to die', and pushing your feet through the floor. The Seeker simply assumed, un-perturbed, situations which I just KNEW would result in serious consequences, and sailed on. He wasn't even pushing its envelope!

 

With all due respect to Peter Garrett, who did a brief test report on the Seeker, and who is one of the most experienced pilots on the planet, I believe - the Seeker simply does things to a level you would not normally even consider broaching.

 

And, Australia has lost it as an indigenous manufacturer. Poor fellow, my country.

 

 

[facthunter]

You second line second para struck a chord.. Nev

 

 

[spacesailor]

M61A1 :SAID, You won't come out it with an endorsement, but you will be wiser.

 

That sounds good, I did do "training" but no certificate, OK for me Just to do a few solo circuits ( could be a joke but I'll wait for replies)

 

spacesailor.

 

 

[facthunter]

Do you just wait for it to be a requirement ?( Which I AM advocating for INSTRUCTORS, since they have other's lives in their hands in a training situation which is more "requiring" of extra flying skill than the normal flying environment.

 

Mean time YOU can elect to do something that may actually save your life. I can guarantee it will change the way you do things for the better. The instructor can/will annotate your log book as proof you have done the training, if you ask, and it would be a good idea to have it recorded, but the main effect is in your performance. Nev

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Do you just wait for it to be a requirement ?( Which I AM advocating for INSTRUCTORS, since they have other's lives in their hands in a training situation which is more "requiring" of extra flying skill than the normal flying environment.Mean time YOU can elect to do something that may actually save your life. I can guarantee it will change the way you do things for the better. The instructor can/will annotate your log book as proof you have done the training, if you ask, and it would be a good idea to have it recorded, but the main effect is in your performance. Nev

A Spinning flight activity endorsement is now a pre-requisite for all new issue grade 3 flight instructor ratings. Maybe the only good thing to come with Part 61!

 

 

[facthunter]

That's a welcome move. RAAus should follow suit. Why NEW and not ALL seems wrong in principle. I did spinning on request of checker, in the Citabria when I last did one in it. (now sold) Signed out as to CPL standard. for Two year check. There's been a long period of denial about this. Time it was corrected. Till early 60's ALL pilots did it . No drama..Nev

 

 

[djpacro]

A Spinning flight activity endorsement is now a pre-requisite for all new issue grade 3 flight instructor ratings.

Prior to Part 61 the instructor rating course required pretty much the same spin training although a requirement for the endorsement was not written into the rules. When CASA took an interest in initial instructor rating competencies perhaps 5 years ago they took a keen interest in this. I'd do that training for instructor trainees who already had a spin endorsement and when CASA rocked up to do the test they'd demand to see an additional spin endorsement signed off by myself (back then it was just a logbook entry).

 

Maybe the only good thing to come with Part 61!

A bit harsh, there are some other good things in Part 61

 

[facthunter]

Any progress is better than none, or going backwards. Nev

 

 

[zodiacpilot]

I witnessed a Mustang spiral into the ground from low altitude. I was present at the opening of Bendigo Airport in Feb 1970, where the headline act at the airshow was a lowlevel pass in a Mustang, owned and flown by Don Busch. He made two low passes over the field, and was requested by the air traffic controller to make an unscheduled third pass. While making the turn to come back for the pass, at 1500ft, the plane dropped a wing and spiralled behind the trees before a black cloud of smoke rose into the air. Here is a copy of the ATSB report: https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/24581/197002554.pdfComments on the wrinkled plum suggest that he may have had a full fuselage tank (behind the seat), which put the C of G too far after for the manouvre. He only had about 25 hours experience on the aircraft, mostly in travel flights.

I also witnessed that.........scary, & at the time hadn't thought I would ever be a pilot cos I'm scared of heights. Incidently, all these years later small pieces are still being found occasionally. Just a piece of useless info, when captains/1st officers practice stalls in Jumbos they take 9000ft to recover to level flight!.

 

 

[SSCBD]

The problem is going to be that some of our members don't even do stalls well - and I have looked at posts here that have said, I refuse to spin or learn to spin.

 

So what is the answer - limit these members with no spin endorsement to No Pax operations?

 

Until we get some RAA aircraft APPROVED as "spinable" and (possibly other aeros)? legally whos going to teach it in RAA??- As any RAA instructor or CFI cant now.

 

By the way I in my opinion also don't want a brand new shinny CFI from RAA who has just learnt to spin, to teach these anyway.

 

On the other side of the fence, in GA you don't need a spin endorsement either.

 

So what's the answer for the RAA??? Unless you go to a GA operation to get an endorsement in a GA aircraft.

 

Its all a can of worms and unraveling.

 

 

[Yenn]

Am I correct in assuming that stick position is too hard to be sure of to prevent stalls. That is what it seems like to me. Many have espoused it as a perfect answer, but none have demonstrated it.

 

What we are talking about here is the result of allowing pilots into planes with poor abilities. The pilots that is, not the planes.

 

 

[facthunter]

Not really. There's GA planes with suitable instructors about, willing to do it. You just don't need to confuse UA with aerobatics. Sometimes sessions , supposed to be about unusual attitude have been a fun flying, intro to aeros , with a bit of showing off added, that won't help your Unusual attitude recoveries much and may tempt you to try and do aeros in the plane you have.

 

The fact RAAus forbids any aerobatic manoeuvers in their type of planes is not likely to change, as a "proper" plane is certified to perform CERTAIN" aerobatic manouevers, is stronger, has a calibrated "G" meter special harness and has special maintenance inspections needed to remain in airworthy condition. The need for an "aerobatic" type is a safety issue as during some "botched" recoveries the student may get the plane well out of shape which is not a safety issue if you have enough height, and a suitably qualified instructor.

 

This is no threat to the RAAus. and they lack credibility if they don't address it. Immediate attention should be given to INSTRUCTORS. If any of them question the need, or refuse, I would suggest they don't GET what they might lack and shouldn't be instructing which is one of the MOST responsible jobs in the game. You don't HAVE to be one. If you don't cut it don't go there. Good training is essential .A pilot only knows what has been taught or perhaps experience may also have taught later , But that's not safe and requires a lot of luck. No pilot should die because WE haven't bothered to cover other than the "easy" parts.. Nev