NO INTENTIONAL SPINS Jabiru

[Guest Qwerty]

This is a question that I have been meaning to get clarification on for some time. The Jab POH says NO INTENTIONAL SPINS. I take it from the wording that UNINTENTIONAL spins are OK, otherwise the note would read NO SPINS. This is the only possible, logical interpretation of the note.

 

So, the way I read this is, if I am poking along in my Jab at 40 kn with the power off and decide that I want to execute a steep turn and I mis-handle the rudder and UNINTENTIONALLY enter a spin, I am still operating within the limits of the aircraft. :thumb_up:

 

Comments??

 

Qwerty

 

 

[GraemeK]

Good question ....

 

Don't know the answer, but Jabiru did extensive spin testing on the J400, as shown somewhere in this video. Something like 100 spins.

 

 

[Tomo]

You really want to feel what it's like to spin a Jab don't you Qwerty?!!!

 

I've also wondered about that too, but in my thinking if something like a spin happens and it's unintentional - that is the sign of a dodgy pilot who doesn't understand his aircraft fully.

 

A really good pilot should never encounter unintentional attitudes unless it is atmospherically caused by wind/gust/lift/sink etc....

 

So considering that, the "No intentional Spins" sticker would be Ok. :thumb_up:

 

 

[GraemeK]

Also, the 160 manual gives spin recovery technique, so I guess they've anticipated that someone might end up there unintentionally.

 

 

[HEON]

Excluding RAA policy, how about product liability?

 

In other words,regardless of how you did it, after the wings come off and you hit the ground, don't come and say it was the Jab's fault:laugh:

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

First of all, Tomo what are you doing on the computer??????? get back to work.

 

Secondly, Jabs spin and recover OK and the wings will not come off a jab unless you do something really stupid like 300 kn dive or hit a tree.

 

What I want to know is, "Is it OK to do unintentional spins" my follow up question is going to be "Since there in no physical difference between unintentional spins and intentional spins, why are intentional spins prohibited."

 

It is my firm belief that spining is a normal aspect of flight, any aircraft that is not recoverable from a spin should not be in the air, any pilot who cannot recover an aircraft from a spin should similarly not be in the air.

 

 

[jcamp]

The issue with no intentional spins is overstress on recovery which is quite easy to do. Also are you capable of recovery, training cannot be done on RAA aircraft and most GA instructors can't/won't do it.

 

Some time after I got the J160 I was checking the stall speeds in various configurations (at >3000 AGL). Stalls were fairly benign until I got to go round configuration (full flap full power) where it went from windscreen full of sky to windscreen full of turning dirt quite quickly, probably because I was concentrating more on airspeed and not expecting quite as quick a break.

 

Subsequent go round stalls (following an instructor brushup session in a 150 Aerobat) no problem as a bit more aware and faster on the feet

 

 

[facthunter]

Spin Certified.

 

If you want to have your aircraft spin certified, be prepared to have at least half of the ones that are available pulled from the sky, and the price of the others go through the roof.

 

Note SOME GA aircraft are not certified for spin recovery. They carry a MANDATORY Ballistic parachute.

 

RAAus aircraft are not permitted to do aerobatics (like many others). RAAs pilots (like many others) are not trained in aerobatics or spin recoveries. I have always advocated that pilots do train in recoveries from unusual attitudes in the right aeroplane.ie one that is strong and certified for aerobatics..This is sometimes known as EMT. (emergency manoeuver training.

 

If you claim that the spin you got into was UNINTENTIONAL, I would suggest that there would have to be a very good reason as to why you got into it or that your flying training was deficient (or not effective). In other words, that you would not be a proficient (competant) pilot. That would then bring a need for some investigation of your training, and no doubt a requirement for further training or an assessment of your attitude.

 

The statement: Intentional spins not permitted relates to the particular aircraft and is a very necessary part ot the POH or aircraft handling notebook, with product liability issues.. It's also particularly good advice.

 

Spin recovery technique varies from aircraft type to type and with loading and configuration of the aircraft as well. It is quite a complex subject and aircraft can behave very differently to what would have been anticipated by the designers. Nev

 

 

[Tomo]

First of all, Tomo what are you doing on the computer??????? get back to work.

Yes I really need to get away from this computer....! But it is my day off, and I was going to go flying - still might! but somebody turned on the fan and its blowing cows and elephants!

 

What I want to know is, "Is it OK to do unintentional spins"

That is an amusing statement....I'm sorry but it is... Can you intentionally do unintentional spins? but you can't do that because the sticker says you can't intentionally do spins. So the only way out of that is to unintentionally do an unintentional spin, but that would be bad piloting...?! Even if you make it look like you unintentionally spun, it is still intentional in the long run... so.... very confusing...!!! :black_eye:

 

 

 

[turboplanner]

NO ITS NOT OK TO DO UNINTENTIONAL SPINS QWERTY - not in the way you're implying.

 

CASA don't use "No Spins" for the same reason they don't use "No Crashes"

 

Why give us bad name by taunting the Regulator, and don't think that we are not under the microscope.

 

I went for a GA flight a few days ago, and the first thing I had to do was reassure the pilot from my own experience that an RAAus identity was not a "Spin" lunatic, and now we read this.

 

 

[Captain]

Yet in the GFA they teach spin recovery to every student, and stalls/spins are a part of your annual flight check.

 

Doing so makes recovery just a routine part of your skill set and has not resulted in a bunch of spin freaks. But it has resulted in a group of pilots who possibly/probably won't freeze on the stick in the event of a spin.

 

Just my 2 pesos worth.

 

 

[turboplanner]

The training is Incipient Spins - incipient meaning "beginning" or "early stage", that is not in the spin yet where G forces are involved.

 

 

[facthunter]

Spinning in Gliders.

 

And so should they. A glider can be much more critical and you are taught in one that permits spinning.. I believe that there is a strong case for pilots of RAAs planes to be proficient in the basics of spin recovery too even more than GA types. I direct you again to my comments re the cost of spin certification. It would be absolutely prohibitive

 

I regret that they do not have to do the training in GA, and believe that it was a mistake to discontinue spin training at about 1962. Even Airliners will spin and enlightened organisations are happy for their pilots to fly privately and keep proficient. It is very easy to have an "upset" at high altitude when margins from stall are a matter of a few knots, or even in a holding pattern with mild icing.

 

In normal flying the chance of an inadvertant stall is not high if you fly in a manner that is positive and fairly conservative re. low speeds, or more accurately, speeds that are a good margin from the stall speed in the phase of flight that you are in. eg if you are going into a steep turn, you either increase the power or lower the nose (or both ) instinctively. Also you will NOT stall unless you pull the stick well back to cause the wing to present at a high angle of attack. Unfortunately it can be a fairly instinctive reaction at times. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

So how many RAAus types have crashed due to spinning in? From my memory of crash statistics there are few spin crashes, except for the dreaded turn back with an engine failure at take off.

 

Personally I used to enjoy spins, but the Jab can enter a spin very rapidly, Chipmunks are much better.

 

 

[turboplanner]

It would be nice to get comprehensive RAAus statistics and then we could see what the danger areas were, and how to respond.

 

I'm totally in agreement with training on Incipient spins (I got it in both GA and Rec Av), and it was a Chipmunk and an Instructor with a vicious sense of humour which taught me the utter bewilderment of an aircraft flying in a very relaxed manner one minute, then when I decided (untrained) to do a steep (90 deg) turn like I'd experienced a few weeks previously (with a trained pilot), I found the sky has no bottom, and with head pushed over by G Forces, didn't know where I was.

 

I suspect the statistics in Ultralights/RAA are the mid air break ups - the ones caused by too much G force either then, or when a previous pilot decided he could handle spins etc. stretched the airframe and didn't tell anyone.

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

My my. What a can of worms. I fail to see the reason for the hysteria. Spins are no big deal. Actually spins are a bit of fun. There are no high G loads in spins (or spin recovery) so I don't know what you (Turbo) are talking about there. Spins don't unduely load the air frame, as far as I know, CASA's concern is competancy of the aircraft's aerodynamics to facilitate recovery. I did nearly unintentionally spin my jab when I was testing Go Round technique. I just wasn't expecting it to snap to the RIGHT and I was ready with the wrong rudder expecting a left wing drop due to torque. I have written about this elsewhere.

 

Does anyone know why spins are seen as such a bogey monster by some. Really they are nothing more than one wing stalled and not flying while the other one is still flying.

 

BTW I am not a "spin lunatic" and I am not intentionally taunting anyone.

 

 

[ossie]

Really they are nothing more than one wing stalled and not flying while the other one is still flying.

OH Dear.........

 

BTW I am not a "spin lunatic" and I am not intentionally taunting anyone

Are you sure.........

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

Hey Ossie

 

Nice choice of aircraft, I am itching to get into a two seater for some aero training.

 

WRT your post, Oh dear what????, did I say something silly?...and ....No, I'm not a spin lunitic, I am just taking a clinical view of a perfectly stable (though not particularly productive) from of flight. I do recognise that the actual turning part of the spin has the potential to cause temporary disorientation to someone who has not experienced it before. But I find it hard to believe that this minor effect could cause the apparent abhorrence of the spin.

 

please explain.

 

Qwerty:raise_eyebrow:

 

 

[Spin]

Qwerty, I think you'll find that the high G involves the recovery from the steep dive which necessarily follows a spin recovery. It is all to easy to haul back a little too lustily on the stick/yoke to prevent the houses from getting bigger at an ever increasing rate.

 

As for the aerodynamic explanation - weeelll, NASA will be mighty embarrassed to find they have wasted all that time and effort studying what is such a simple phenomenon after all

 

If anyone is to be accused of being a spin maniac, let it be me. I chose my name because of an incident whilst I was doing my PPL - I found that spinning and recovering myself was a huge confidence boost and when sent off to the training area soon after going solo, decided to expand my confidence still further with a series of spins, left and right. Back in the flight school a little later, the CFI remarked that my instructor had been putting me through the wringer with all the spins (he was out with another student), promptly turning a shade of purple when advised that I had been solo. No-one had explained to me that spinning was a dual only activity! Anyhow, I'm mighty glad that I had the opportunity to explore them fairly comprehensively - however, don't believe that I would like to join the test pilot program on an aircraft not certified for them. As pointed out elsewhere, some aircraft have peculiarities in recovery and I wouldn't want to find that out at the wrong time. Ask anyone who has had a Piper Tomahawk spin go flat on them!

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

Hey Spin, 2G, may be 3G in pullout its all pretty tame stuff. I know that some a/c will flatten out with even a slightly aft CofG and that the Cirrus has a chute because it won't recover. I don't think I'd be comfortable in an aircraft that doesnt spin properly, although I have flown a Cirrus.

 

I guess I started with a question about grammar and semantics, ie The only reason to differentiate between intentional and unintentional spins rather than just stating "NO SPINS"...MUST be and i repeat my self here it MUST be that unintentional spins are OK.

 

Then the thread moved on to suggestions that I might be a spin lunatic. I can't see what the fuss is about.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Qwerty, I think you'll find that the high G involves the recovery from the steep dive which necessarily follows a spin recovery. It is all to easy to haul back a little too lustily on the stick/yoke to prevent the houses from getting bigger at an ever increasing rate.As for the aerodynamic explanation - weeelll, NASA will be mighty embarrassed to find they have wasted all that time and effort studying what is such a simple phenomenon after all

 

If anyone is to be accused of being a spin maniac, let it be me. I chose my name because of an incident whilst I was doing my PPL - I found that spinning and recovering myself was a huge confidence boost and when sent off to the training area soon after going solo, decided to expand my confidence still further with a series of spins, left and right. Back in the flight school a little later, the CFI remarked that my instructor had been putting me through the wringer with all the spins (he was out with another student), promptly turning a shade of purple when advised that I had been solo. No-one had explained to me that spinning was a dual only activity! Anyhow, I'm mighty glad that I had the opportunity to explore them fairly comprehensively - however, don't believe that I would like to join the test pilot program on an aircraft not certified for them. As pointed out elsewhere, some aircraft have peculiarities in recovery and I wouldn't want to find that out at the wrong time. Ask anyone who has had a Piper Tomahawk spin go flat on them!

HI spin cessna didnt have much luck with their 162 skycatcher either

[Spin]

You're right Darren, although after the highly public snafu (x2?) I suspect that the Skycatcher is now probably more spin-worthy than most modern designs. I believe they redesigned most of the tailfeathers to overcome the problem.

 

 

[blueline]

Oh dear.i_dunno

 

Maybe instead of "No intentional spins" they could write

 

1. Spinning a Jabiru = Bad

 

and

 

2. Spinning a Jabiru = illegal

 

and

 

3. If you do end up in a spin, Jabiru are not sure that you will be able to get out of it, but if you do please let us know. We are always keen on other people doing our testing.

 

 

[DarkSarcasm]

3. If you do end up in a spin, Jabiru are not sure that you will be able to get out of it, but if you do please let us know. We are always keen on other people doing our testing.

I vote for this one (simply because I'd be amused every time I read it)

 

 

[facthunter]

Reality.

 

The only people who underrate the dangers of a spin are those who have done few. The aircraft is not in positive control. It is autorotating and may continue to do so (depending on the circumstances) till it impacts the ground at a descent rate which can be around 6,000 fpm, or more. The problem is not the "G" force on pullout (which is usually about 2.8 G) but the difficulty of getting out of the spin. Yenn, the chipmunk was always an aeroplane that you could never be sure just how it would react .I taught spins in them and one of the best instructors that I ever knew was killed in one, doing spins.

 

The other thing that I will pick up on is that "spinning is a dual activity" Never heard of that one although local groups can make rules up if they want to. I would like to think that if I was doing a spin recovery, that I wouldn't have to fight off someone else on the controls. Please take spins seriously as they are not just another "normal" manoeuver, FAR from it. You wouldn't know how many incidents/accidents actually involve spins. A "flick" is the beginning of a spin. Like the classic and exaggerated stalls that we practice, the spin never occurs like a practiced one, in reality, either. Nev