djpacro

Nope, not a fact at all. For parts which require a safe life then it is whatever it turns out to be. If for a part it is, say 1000 hours, for discussion then it will not break (unless operated contrary to that expected for fatigue life determination) at that safe life which is a small fraction of the life determined for it. Simply buy another one and take comfort in the safe life concept.

and you need to keep the policy in place for some years after you stop the work.

Not according to my lawyer some years ago. only if the policy specifically covers that activity.

Gday Mike.

Article on spin training in the Feb issue of Sport Pilot - with this note:

Same medical requirements too, I hope.

I was referring to my own Bocian flying, same thought.

I'd forgotten about the Bocian, it was a very long time ago.

The Cessna 150 will readily get into a stable, fully developed spin; a 152 needs a more aggressive entry technique but can also get into a stable, fully developed spin. As for recovery, well, the full story is here: http://www.kopingsfk.se/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/10.-Spin-Characteristics.pdf about the 150 through to the R172.

Yes, I still see some teaching incipient spins only - it bites some-one down the track when the poor technique is found not to be effective in a fully developed spin. I still see quite a few who do not teach spin recovery iaw the flight manual for the type and too many pilots who have not read the flight manual for the types that they spin. Somewhat similar to the very old rules in Australia. Spin training was not part of the PPL syllabus although I was required to do spins in each subsequent aerobatic type that I got an endorsement on. Separate endorsements for the Fuji 160 and 180 as the latter had a C/S prop - consequently did many spins with Roy Goon who insisted that every one be six turns before initiating recovery. The Beagle Pup required aft ballast for spinning as I recall. My Chipmunk and Tiger flying came after those individual endorsements were abolished. The flat spin, fully developed spin mode in the CT-4. The every which way spins of the Pitts from upright steep accelerated to inverted flat (full throttle, full aileron then move the stick full back). Interesting that PB's Wolf Pitts does not recover using the Beggs-Mueller technique. Quick guesstimate: 8000 spins and still spinning. A plug for an excellent book on the subject: http://www.amazon.com.au/Stalls-Spins-Safety-Revised-Edition-ebook/dp/B008P1HLJ4/ref=pd_sim_351_1/375-1724477-6355605?ie=UTF8&refRID=0SZT71MJNJ0QWSKP0MV1

WARNING - it is addictive.

I remember that.

not bad for a trainee tailwheel pilot.

Its all in the report.

Yep, it is a good but basic summary of stuff. I used to have that Fortran program on my computer.

Yep, so did his predecessor.

Seems to have fallen off the NTRS. Here you are https://www.dropbox.com/s/orfmqo5847nfnh0/NASACR1975.pdf?dl=0

Another email from CASA today: apologising for omitting two endorsements and noting thst two others are subject to technical assessment - it is not really that complex. Thinking that buying an N registered aurplane and flying it on my USA licence is the way to go.

Feel free to use it - my observations indicate around 10-20%.

Link to my hard drive? Try the NASA Technical Report server or Cranfield University library - both free.

More good advice at http://www.taildraggers.com/Documentation.aspx?page=StickBack (see other pages there too) and http://www.dylanaviation.com/

Easy to get rid of me.

From NASA Report CR-1975, Riding and Handling Qualities of Light Aircraft: "The change in rolling moment due to variation in yawing velocity ... wing provides the major contribution ... left wing moves faster than the right wing, producing more lift ... consequently ... rolling moment ..." whereas "the change in rolling moment .. caused by variation in sideslip angle ... is the result of wing dihedral effect and the moment resulting from the vertical tail center of pressure located above the equilibrium x-axis ..." Apply rudder and you get both a yawing velocity and a sideslip (or skid). The report quantifies each effect for a Cessna 182 as an example.