I've noticed that spins have been brought but a few times but are always treated like the plague. I don't want to offend anyone but if I were trying to figure the limits of my plane and doing so brought me close to a spin I would want to know exactly where the spin would begin even if that meant a spin might actually occur . Have most pilots never done spins? I can't count the number of spins I have done, all with a CFI. I did them because I wanted to know what to expect and when to expect it. Recently I was shown what if feels like to enter a spin in a base to final turn, at altitude of course, when when you tuck the inside wing. It was scary I was extremely grateful for that demonstration because it made me even more careful about keepin it centered in low and slow turns. I just can't imagine not fully testing the plane because the treat of a spin.

Hi, my name is Don, and I hate spins.

I've spun 172's before so that I would know what to do if needed, and like you, decided that the demo was enough. My intent when testing the STOL kit was to see if it would stall in what I considered a reasonable deck angle. The deck angle was uncomfortable all by itself - I did not want to add to the "pleasure" by taking it all of the way into a spin.

I take my plane for a "spin" all the time! It is great fun! Or, are you guys talking about something else?

KR5T wrote:Hi, my name is Don, and I hate spins.

Hi Don. My name's Gump, and I'm not real fond of spins either.

Most of my flying career was spent in crap weather, that tried to turn me and my airplane upside down all the time, so I'm rather phobic about seeing the green where the blue should be.

I still do a couple hours of aerobatics every few years just because I need to, same as I do gliders when I feel myself getting sloppy and lazy and need to remember what my feet are for. But, it doesn't mean I find it enjoyable.

Gump

Just so you guys know I do enjoy spins but I do not do them for fun, I only do them because I know they might happen and I want to be ready. Since I have only been flying for a couple years I can't say that I do them every couple years but I plan to do them often enough that I feel 100% confident I will be able to recover from one.

KR5T,
I see your point about the reasonable deck angle and understand why there isn't much of a need to go beyond that. I'd want to know how things feel all the way up to a stall even if that means getting close to a spin....but that's just me.

I guess I must be sort of different then, because as long as I know I have enough altitude under my butt I think they are fun. I almost made my instructor puke when I did my CFI after about the eighth spin. I just don't find them particularly scary, although I will say that the first one I did almost scared a green one out of me.

While I was out practicing solo during my primary training and mushing around doing some slow flight about 3,000 agl (field elevation was 213 ft.) I ran through some turbulence I think got flipped over. The creosote bushes were going around and getting big real fast, I was so startled that I just let go of everything and all of a sudden I was just in a dive. I recovered, flew straight back to the airport, landed and tied down. I almost couldn't walk my knees were so rubbery.

I requested spin training from my instructor without telling him why and shortly before I went for my check ride we went up and did some spin recovery and sure enough! I saw exactly the same thing I had seen before, only now I was shown how to properly recover. Once I had practiced it and became more comfortable with the recovery it wasn't too scary.

I am going to be scheduling a BFR shortly and intend to include some spin recovery in that. I think, like others, that one should stay proficient in spin recoveries.

Jim

Whee, I agree. Spin training is not about spin recovery nearly as much as it is about spin entry. Who cares about recovery on base to short final? There's not enough altitude to recover usually in a situation like that, so the critical thing is never spinning in the first place.

A good exercise that I used to do with my aerobatic instructor is called Rudder Stalls. He made me hold onto the v-brace in the Super Cub we were flying, and he held the stick back to maintain the stall.

We just sank in a stall while I worked the rudder to keep us upright and out of a spin. It's a weird undulating pumping motion of the rudders, as any sustained input to either side would put a wing over. You can actually kinda steer the aircraft in that situation, but it is very odd.

1SeventyZ wrote:he held the stick back to maintain the stall.

We just sank in a stall while I worked the rudder to keep us upright and out of a spin. It's a weird undulating pumping motion of the rudders, as any sustained input to either side would put a wing over. You can actually kinda steer the aircraft in that situation, but it is very odd.

Matt did a couple "rudder stalls" while he was giving me my BFR, it was pretty cool. I hadn't ever seen or heard of them before but I can see how they would keep you footwork up to par.

Just be REAL careful WHAT you spin. Most airplanes these days are not certified for spins, and if that's what you are flying, DO NOT spin it.

There are lots of surprises in some of those.

Get a copy of Rich Stowell's latest book, and read the chapter on the NASA general aviation spin study. There are a few eye openers in there.

Don't spin aircraft casually.

If you spin an airplane, you are required to be wearing parachutes UNLESS you are training for a Flight Instructor certificate.

And, yes, there's a reason for that.

MTV

I love spinning, I have read both of Rich's books, MTV is the person that turned me on to them.

I have been spinning planes for years, reading these books has made me very aware of what plane and category I am going to spin.

Mike is absolutely correct on the books, get them, they compliment Sparky's stuff very well.

1SeventyZ wrote:
A good exercise that I used to do with my aerobatic instructor is called Rudder Stalls. He made me hold onto the v-brace in the Super Cub we were flying, and he held the stick back to maintain the stall.

We just sank in a stall while I worked the rudder to keep us upright and out of a spin. It's a weird undulating pumping motion of the rudders, as any sustained input to either side would put a wing over. You can actually kinda steer the aircraft in that situation, but it is very odd.

It sounds like a 'falling leaf stall'. That's what we call it around here. I found them easier to do in a Citabria than an Extra.

I too have done the "falling leaf' using just rudder to keep the wings level.

I think having a real understanding of potential spin scenarios is a must.

I have witnessed two aircraft that stalled on final in the last year.Both went over on their backs into the trees and fortunately the occupants of both survived.
Both were low and slow in gusty winds.

Bill

I too have done the "falling leaf" manuver many times. My CFI is also an areobatic instructor and he has me do a lot of slow flight in many different configurations to get used to the plane and how to recover. Lots of power on stalls, approach configuation stalls, and tight spiral turns with a minimum radius. I practice low tight turns when approaching the airport whenever I can...no local traffic. This really helps when I get into some of the tighter airstrips. If all one practices is standard approaches what happens when you are confronted with something non standard?
Practice, Practice, Practice

Whether you like them or not, I think every student should have to learn spin recovery within the first ten hours of flight training. I can't imagine anything more stupid than telling a ham-footed student to go out and practice stalls (at any altitude) without first making sure they can recover from a spin.

How many of you folks actually went out and practiced stalls as a solo student pilot? I did, and it scared the crap out of me every single time. Sweat would soak through my freaking belt by the time I'd done ten stalls. Needless to say I was basically just waisting Hobbs time...you don't learn anything when you're that tense.

While it's true that spin avoidance is more important than spin recovery, if you toy around with stalls long enough you're going to get into a spin. So if you don't know how to get out of a spin, it's pretty unlikely you're going to spend much time playing with stalls.

My flight school didn't spin their planes...my guess is because they didn't want to wear out the gyros. After I got my ticket I found a guy who did spin training in a J3 cub...something I should have done a lot earlier. Once I found out how fun spins were, I couldn't get enough of them.

When Snoopydoc was getting her license she found a CFI with a Citabria, and long before she soloed she was doing spins. Some folks think that spins will scare away a student, and maybe they're right. But if unusual attitudes are that frightening to someone, they probably shouldn't be a pilot.

I figure that if I don't come back from a checkout or BFR with my back side not soaking wet, I really wasn't finding out what myself or the plane could do....stalls till you puke!

It is interesting, but the gyro aspect has pretety much been debunked. There is a very interesting chapter on this in Rich's book where a bunch of rebuild shops all looked at gyros and rebuild times etc.

The bottom line is there was very little difference between gyros that are and have been spun and those that are not.

Before I soloed I did spins with my instructor. The first one or two were a little uncomfortable but then they weren't too bad after that. I think it could be good to know what they are and how to get out of them but don't see how that will do you much good on a turn from base to final. I think keeping it coordinated and knowing what the plane feels and sounds like when it is close to stalling is better.

soaringhiggy wrote:It is interesting, but the gyro aspect has pretety much been debunked. There is a very interesting chapter on this in Rich's book where a bunch of rebuild shops all looked at gyros and rebuild times etc.

The bottom line is there was very little difference between gyros that are and have been spun and those that are not.

I can remember long ago spinning a 152 in training and it would royally screw up the DG. That thing would repeatedly make 45 degree spins after we returned to level flight for a while. I can't imagine that was good for it.
And yes be very careful what you spin. I unintentionally got a Mooney M20J on it's back and turning trying to demonstrate a "return to target" and it didn't like to recover, it did, but slowly.
BTW helicopters fall off to the right in a hammer head all on their own, airplanes don't

Mike,
Have to point out that you are incorrect on a couple important points. You can do spins in your approved aircraft without a parachute, without a CFI, and without breaking regs as long as you are not carrying passengers (non-crew). CFIs can teach spin training without parachutes even if the trainee is not going for their instructor rating. The provision would also allows a CFI to do "flight maneuvers" such as recovery from unusual attitudes that may exceed the definition of aerobatic flight.
I will counter this by pointing out that the regs allow us to do lots of things - such as fly into the mountains in 1SM vis and clear of clouds - that may not be wise. I do own a pair a' chutes and prefer to have them on me when doing spins and other maneuvers. However, when winter rolls around and the citabria is on skis I haven't been keeping the chutes up to date on their repacks ($100 here - what are y'all paying??). At that point, if I am confronted with someone wanting to do spins in an approved plane I have to consider the risk of flying per the regs without chutes or not fly at all. In weighing the risks, I have decided my personal minimums are OK without the chutes as long as there is no intent to do more than 2 turn spins in a known aircraft.

I personally would wear my well cared for and properly stored chute for a year at a time if it were just me (no liability) but at the same time the regs say I can't even have it in the plane if out of date.

For everyone's reading pleasure, I have included below, the pertinent text of:
AC61-67 spin training
91.303 aerobatic flight
91.307 parachutes

I believe that the current training of pilots is quite deficient in stall/spin "awareness". I have enjoyed taking many pilots for a spin. Having witnessed their reactions, I can relate that not many would do well with recovery from an inadvertent spin if they have never experienced a spin . I would like to think that their chances of survival are improved after learning the recovery process even once in their flight careers. As with anything in life or in aviation, risks must be considered as should risk reducing strategies.
Humbly submitted,
Matt

AC 61-67C states:
301. SPIN TRAINING AND PARACHUTES. Part 91, section 91.307(c), prohibits the pilot of a civil aircraft from executing any intentional maneuver that exceeds 60° of bank relative to the horizon, or exceeds 30° noseup or nosedown attitude relative to the horizon, unless an approved parachute is worn by each occupant (other than a crewmember). Section 91.307(d) states, in pertinent part, that section 91.307(c) does not apply to flight tests for a pilot certificate or rating; or spins and other flight maneuvers required by the regulations for any certificate or rating when given by a certified flight instructor (CFI) or an airline transport pilot (ATP) instructing in accordance with section 61.167.
a. Section 61.183(i) requires an applicant for a flight instructor certificate or rating to receive flight training in stall awareness, spin entry, spins, and spin recovery procedures. The applicant must also possess and demonstrate instructional proficiency in these areas to receive the certificate or rating.
b. Because spin entry, spins, and spin recovery are required for a flight instructor certificate or rating, a person receiving instruction from a CFI (or an ATP instructing in accordance with section 61.167) need not wear an approved parachute while instruction is being provided in these maneuvers. This provision applies regardless of the certificate or rating for which the person is receiving training and also if the person is receiving instruction that is not being provided for the purpose of obtaining any additional certificate or rating. The instructor providing the training is also not required to wear an approved parachute while providing this flight training.
c. Additionally, it should be noted that any pilot or required crewmember may perform a maneuver that exceeds the limits prescribed in section 91.307(c) without wearing an approved parachute, provided there are no other occupants in the aircraft or the other occupants are wearing approved parachutes.

Here's the pertinent sections of part 91:
§ 91.303 Aerobatic flight.
top
No person may operate an aircraft in aerobatic flight—

(a) Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement;
(b) Over an open air assembly of persons;
(c) Within the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E airspace designated for an airport;
(d) Within 4 nautical miles of the center line of any Federal airway;
(e) Below an altitude of 1,500 feet above the surface; or
(f) When flight visibility is less than 3 statute miles.

For the purposes of this section, aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight.


§ 91.307 Parachutes and parachuting.
top
(a) No pilot of a civil aircraft may allow a parachute that is available for emergency use to be carried in that aircraft unless it is an approved type and—
(1) If a chair type (canopy in back), it has been packed by a certificated and appropriately rated parachute rigger within the preceding 120 days; or
(2) If any other type, it has been packed by a certificated and appropriately rated parachute rigger—
(i) Within the preceding 120 days, if its canopy, shrouds, and harness are composed exclusively of nylon, rayon, or other similar synthetic fiber or materials that are substantially resistant to damage from mold, mildew, or other fungi and other rotting agents propagated in a moist environment; or
(ii) Within the preceding 60 days, if any part of the parachute is composed of silk, pongee, or other natural fiber, or materials not specified in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section.

(b) Except in an emergency, no pilot in command may allow, and no person may conduct, a parachute operation from an aircraft within the United States except in accordance with part 105 of this chapter.

(c) Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an approved parachute, no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) may execute any intentional maneuver that exceeds—
(1) A bank of 60 degrees relative to the horizon; or
(2) A nose-up or nose-down attitude of 30 degrees relative to the horizon.

(d) Paragraph (c) of this section does not apply to—
(1) Flight tests for pilot certification or rating; or
(2) Spins and other flight maneuvers required by the regulations for any certificate or rating when given by—
(i) A certificated flight instructor; or
(ii) An airline transport pilot instructing in accordance with §61.67 of this chapter.


Here's a link to the entire Advisory Circular on stall/spin training
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guida ... 61-67C.pdf

I personally would wear my well cared for and properly stored chute for a year at a time if it were just me (no liability) but at the same time the regs say I can't even have it in the plane if out of date.

Call me a rebel, but phuck the regulations. Is anyone out there actually saying that they'd rather do aerobatic flight without a parachute than with a parachute that wasn't packed within some randomly picked number of days?

I'd say that there is precious little liability involved. If you need a parachute and it works despite being out of date, you're unlikely to incur any liability which is worse than falling to your death. If you need your parachute and it doesn't work, and it's out of date, it's unlikely an attorney is going to contact you in the afterlife and subpena you to a deposition.

I guess you could get ramp checked and get dinged for out of date chutes, but that's a pretty small risk compared to not having a parachute when you need one.

No offense to your decisions...you know what you're doing. I just don't agree with following a regulation when it's safer not to.