Let's talk spins......

[UndauntedFlyer]

Let’s talk spins…….

The FAA’s current spin training, as a requirement and a qualification for the CFI practical test, is totally inadequate and dangerous……all at the same time.

The only safe way to do spins in a non-aerobatic airplane that is approved for spins (C152, C-172, etc) is by a one-turn maneuver only. Unfortunately most spins that are done in preparation for the CFI certificate in such airplanes intentionally result in more turns than just one-turn. The problem here is that the “spin instructors,” for the most part, have very little spin training themselves and may therefore be unable to recognize the approach of danger. And if the unthinkable were to happen, there is no quick release door and no parachutes to use even if there was such a door.

Therefore, if a potential CFI really wants to get proper spin training they should contact an aerobatic instructor, get training in a proper aerobatic airplane (Decathlon Pitts, Extra, etc), wear a parachute as is required for most all aerobatic training and have fun.

Proper CFI spin training should include multi-turn upright spins with both power-on and power-off, flat spins, experimental spins with both in-spin and out-spin aileron inputs, cross-over spins (upright to inverted) and inverted spins, all to proper recovers. CFI spin training should also include spin training with demonstrations and practice recoveries from improper spin entries, including recognition of and recoveries from spins that show unusual developments.

But even after an aerobatic spin training program, CFI spin training in non-aerobatic airplanes should still be done to just one-turn as a matter of how to safely demonstrate spins in such airplanes.

One-turn spins to recovery should also be taught to all Private/Commercial Pilot students.

Your comments and/or questions are welcome…….

 

[Kream926]

well...
i agree about spin recovery to private students but i have some trouble as it is breaking the fear of some about normal (power-off)stalls. i do however like you said demo a stall in a 52 but only 1 rotation. i did however go up with a guy in an extra 300 and done some real ones

 

[papanovember]

The FAA’s current spin training, as a requirement and a qualification for the CFI practical test, is totally inadequate and dangerous……all at the same time.

Yes it is. After doing my "spin training" for my CFI I didn't feel like I had the ability to properly teach stall spin awareness to my students.


Unfortunately most spins that are done in prep for the CFI certificate in such airplanes intentionally result in more turns than just one-turn. The problem here is that the “spin instructors,” for the most part, have very little spin training themselves and may therefore be unable to recognize the approach of danger.

Exactly, I know of many hot shot instructors who have done stupid things in 152's. "oh a barrel roll is perfectly safe you are only pulling one G" yeah until you botch the recovery and blow past the load limit pulling out. The first barrel roll I ever did was in a Decathlon and I pulled back too much while inverted and ended up hitting 5 g's on the way out.

Therefore, if a potential CFI really wants to get proper spin training they should contact an aerobatic instructor, get training in a proper aerobatic airplane, wear a parachute as is required for most all aerobatic training and have fun.

That's what I did and I had a blast. I did emergency recovery training in the 8KCAB and stall spin awareness training in the Extra 300.

Proper CFI spin training should include multi-turn upright spins with both power-on and power-off, flat spins, spins with in-spin and out-spin aileron inputs, cross-over spins and inverted spins, all to proper recovers. CFI spin training should also include spin training with demonstrations and recoveries from improper spin entries or spin development.

I think all commercial applicants should be required to take an aerobatics course but that is just me.


One-turn spins to recovery should also be taught to all Private Pilot students.

Yes it should

 

[midlifeflyer]

The FAA’s current spin training, as a requirement and a qualification for the CFI practical test, is totally inadequate and dangerous……all at the same time.

I tend to agree that it can be inadequate, but not necessarily for the same reason. I did my obligatory turn in a 152. My CFI was happy to sign me off, but I wasn't. These were my first live exposure to spins and I wasn't satisfied that going up once was enough to make me comfortable. So we went up again, this time in a Citabria, which was actually fun.

But I really don't think it was the Citrabira that made me feel more comfortable; it was going the second time. Our students don't "get" stalls or steep turns or lazy 8s right the first time; why should we expect CFI candidates to "get" spins right away.

I don't necessarily agree with the rest of the post. I understand the arguments on both side of the "hot" spin issue but I'm a fence-sitter on this one. My only spin training was for my CFI. I have no problem recovering from a student-induced spin (been there done that). At the same time, there's nothing that's happened in the rest of my flying to make me feel that my pre-CFI training was inadequate without it.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

My only spin training was for my CFI. I have no problem recovering from a student-induced spin (been there done that). At the same time, there's nothing that's happened in the rest of my flying to make me feel that my pre-CFI training was inadequate without it.

Midlifeflyer: Thanks for your reply. As a CFI part of your authority is to teach spins to other CFI's. Do you feel comfortable when teaching spins to new CFI's?

I have taught spin recoveries to CFI applicants and have had some of these students recover so abruptly with full forward elevator that the airplane crossed-over into an inverted spin. Then by that student holding rudder opposite to the upright entry rudder they were actually holding in-spin rudder while inverted, all the while thinking they were holding recovery rudder. This situation gives no clues as to what is happening or as to why the expected recovery rudder is not working. Other incorrect control inputs while spinning can also cause dangerous spin attitudes to develop and must be stopped before they can over stress a utility category airplane.


As far as spins are concerned: "Training is always your best investment in safety." And as you have so correctly pointed out, one spin demo flight is just no where near enough as CFI prep training.

 

[onthebeach]

Spin Training for Private/Commercial?

J. McClellan of Flying magazine once wrote an article in which he came out in favor of the FAA's current policy regarding required spin training for Private or Commercial applicants.

He made a good argument, something along these lines (can't remember it exactly, so I'm omitting quotes and enclosing his thoughts as I recall them in >><<):

>>If the airplane does not stall, the airplane cannot spin.
Therefore stall awareness, stall avoidance, and stall recovery is sufficient for safety.
The big objection to the FAA's policy omitting required spin training for other-than-CFI certification is that fatalities continue to result from the low-altitude stall-spin scenarios.
However, these fatalities are not evidence that spin training is required, but that the stall awareness/avoidance/recovery training of the pilots in question was insufficient, or that their currency in those areas of operation was insufficient, or both.
The clinching argument is this: How can we reasonably expect that a pilot who is so unskilful or unaware as to get into a stall-spin scenario at 500 feet AGL in a traffic pattern, will then instaneously be so skilful as to recover from a spin (or incipient spin) at less than 500 feet AGL?<<

The thought in the last sentence is what settled the argument for me.

We can go around and around on the issue, but the FAA is unlikely to change its position.

To me as a CFI, the issue is really pretty pointless, because both we CFIs and our students have a choice in the matter.

That choice is: If a CFI feels very strongly that spin training for Private and or Commercial should be required, they will no doubt be proficient and comfortable in giving said training, or know of another CFI to whom they will refer their students for this instruction.
And the student who desires spin training, even though it's not required for the certificates, has doubtless made this decision on the basis of some factor other than PTS requirements. This would likely be either a personal desire for additional proficiency, knowledge that he/she will be seeking CFI certification in future, or the recommendation of a CFI or other more experienced pilot that in his/her opinion, the training is desirable. Such students will likely seek out a CFI proficient and comfortable with giving spin training.
And so the circle is closed.

 

[Pilot_Ryan]

Let’s talk spins…….

Your comments and/or questions are welcome…….

I'll comment. Let's see; my run through this gauntlet included a stage in my life in which I was flying intermediate to advanced level aerbatics, then teaching aerobatics, then narrowing my instructional focus to spin and upset recovery/avoidance. All in the appropriate aircraft, of course.

I figure I've probably recovered from (insert a five-digit number here) spins of all kinds; accelerated, flat, inverted, flat-inverted, inadvertent, in many types of airplanes, most of them aerobatic, but C-172s as well. (Don't worry, nothing exotic in the 172.)

I strongly believe there's a great value in spin avoidance and recovery training, especially above the one-off "spin endorsement" required for CFIs. However, one thing you've got to come to grips with when you get into the spin debate is that like it or not, since the FAA has dropped the spin requirement for a pilot certificate, accidents/fatalities in spins have gone down. The remedy was worse than the cure. It's hard to argue with results. So while I wouldn't call the current regulations "dangerous," it seems to me that students who seek out a higher-level of training from an experienced spin instructor are giving themselves a big leg up.

I spun my student pilots. That was just the way I did things. It wasn't required, and if they wanted to beg off I'd settle for 'spin avoidance training.' These people are adults and can make decisions for themselves. Out of all my private pilot students, only one turned down the chance to spin the airplane.

Was never much interested in the parachute issue. They're not required for teaching spins at any level of pilot training (per FAA Chief Counsel, after Bill Kershner wrote them about the mis-worded 14 CFR 91.307 in the nineties) and for most spin accidents they wouldn't have made any difference. Parachutes are useful for aerobatics, when a stuck flight control or structural failure offers little choice but to bail out. Most spin fatalities occur after the pilot forces the airplane into a stall/spin at low altitude; the parachute is just a bulky feel-good measure in that instance. Proper spin training conducted at altitude will offer ample time to recover, and this instructor dunna believe in the "rogue" spin. They're all recoverable, at least in the airplanes we fly. That said, if you want to wear a chute, go ahead. (And when I taught upset recovery, we did wear them.)

While I agree that CFI spin training should be more comprehensive, I don't think we'll ever see a requirement for exotic spin recoveries, nor should we. (Besides, it would take an advanced or unlimited category aerobatic airplane to safely practice inverted and flat inverted spin recovery; and the lower-end of the aerobatic spectrum, e.g. Citabria, Decathlon, etc., won't really flatten out convincingly.) Comprehensive training in my opinion should include recoveries from fully-developed spins, and most instructors and pilots have never seen one of those, even if they think otherwise. Part of my spin recovery course included recovery from an inadvertent (self-induced) spin at the conclusion of the course. I planned the event so the entry was self-induced by the pilot, but they were not aware until the last second that they were about to enter a spin. They were then expected to recover the aircraft without any input from me. (Note, this was with full-power application in the airplane which is how many inadvertent spins are actually entered, instead of power-off which is very benign.) In my view, a number of recoveries from incipient and fully-developed spins, both with power and without, to the left and to the right, as well as recovery from a simulated ham-fisted student making the pro-spin inputs, are what we should expect from flight instructor candidates.

By the way, there is nothing unsafe about a multi-turn spin in an approved airplane like a C-172 in the utility category. The C-172 is a lousy spin trainer, not because it's dangerous in a fully-developed spin, but because it's built in such a way that it doesn't want to spin. It must be forced. Pilots can use the wrong technique and still recover, which is no good, because those techniques won't transfer to other airplanes.

I won't ever support a spin training requirement for private/commercial pilots. That means a lot of instructors who have no business teaching spins will be offering that kind of training, and safety will be adversely affected.

It's not a simple issue, and while requiring a higher level of training seems to be the simple answer, it's not. The way to derive a higher level of safety for individual pilots is to seek out advanced training from instructors experienced in that type of training.

Best regards!

 

[OrionFE]

I did spin awareness training years ago when it was required for a Private Pilot lic. Back then it scared the "bajeezes" out of me! But, what I learned from that even to this day, I am always aware of stall speed and keeping the ball centered at all times. My instructer use to always say when I was doing stalls and the ball would be out, "good, I like doing spins", so that is always etched in my mind.

 

[CopilotDoug]

Will little Johnny Flysalot be instructing in a 152 or an Extra 300? How will a 152 behave in a spin when unbeknownst to the 2 BIG instructors up front, the aircraft is over gross and has a CG exceeding the back of the envelope? In my opinion, the training should be done in the aircaft the person will spend most of their time in.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I have taught spin recoveries to CFI applicants and have had some of these students recover so abruptly with full forward elevator that the airplane crossed-over into an inverted spin....

Sounds like they needed some training in basic stall recovery BEFORE getting into the spin training.

Kinda like teaching tailwheel...everybody wants to learn to takeoff and land, but if you can't fly the darn airplane, you're not going to be able to takeoff and land.

Fly safe!

David

 

[nosehair]

My CFI was happy to sign me off, but I wasn't. These were my first live exposure to spins and I wasn't satisfied that going up once was enough to make me comfortable.
Our students don't "get" stalls or steep turns or lazy 8s right the first time; why should we expect CFI candidates to "get" spins right away.

It was never intended that "one time" should be enough. The quality of training has degraded to that point. CFI applicants are getting their certificates with way too little training in spins. The endorsement is a lie.

I routinely require at least 2 spin flights. The first is me teaching. First, one turn spins to get over the anxiety, then 2 & 3 turns to get better oriented and confident and in control. But no more than 3 turns in a 152. Actually, it's very hard to keep it in a spin beyond 2 or 3. Then the CFI applicant takes me up on a different day and teaches me spins.

But the important point is that I don't sign off an instructor applicant until he has taken me up after a good briefing on spins and than actally shows me some good confidence building spins.

I'm in control of that - me, the flight instructor, by virture of my CFI and endorsement power. We are the controllers of the proficiency of our students - not the FAA.

The quality has degraded because we have let it.

You don't have to keep passing on the disease. Demand spin proficiency of your CFI students just like it says in the regulation that you are endorsing off on.

 

[mpflies2]

Spin training in the Zlin

I did my spin recovery training for CFI 2 days ago. I had previously done spin training for commercial in a decathalon a little over a year ago.

My spin training for CFI was done in a Zlin. This was a very fun airplane to fly. We got up to do the first spin...The spin was first demoed to me, and then it was my turn. What I found was that though on the ground I could spit out spin recovery in a heart beat, when it was time to do the real thing, I drew a blank. I put myself in the spin and reduced the power, neutralized the ailerons, opposite rudder.....and I couldn't figure out why I was still spinning.....Woops, forgot to push forward on the stick. Ok, so we're onto the next spin.....this time I did it and called out what I was doing.....ok, reduce...uh reduce...uh...umm....Everything was happening so quick that though I did manage to recover, I got hung up on my words and couldn't talk my way through it. So we did it again, this time I got everything in the right order. The problem on this one was that when I went to recover after breaking the spin and neutralize the rudders, I went a hair to far and past the neutral position, causing a snap roll and spin in the opposite direction.....Through practicing about 6 more, I began to get them down, but none were a "great" recovery.....all mediocre, but I was recovering and I was teaching it. One problem I kept tending to do was push the stick past my knees (full forward), instead of only to my knees, which was causing the airplane to start pulling negative G's and speeding up rapidly........

So what have I learned from all this? I technically recovered fine, and can spit this stuff out on the ground, but if this were to happen randomly in everyday flying, where I hadn't thought about what I was going to do right before it happened, I could easily blank.....Its not that I'm not good at it, but like with any manuever, things become more natural and easier to do with experience (One of our 6 priniciples of learning)...haha, and so I don't know if one flights worth of spins would be enough to have half the pilots out there be able to recover as soon as it happens...And lets face it, these often happen in base to final turns where you are prolly only 400 to 500 feet above the ground. Chances of recovery with only one days practice probably isnt sufficient.

This did lead me to say...man, we lose 1000-1500 feet in only a matter of seconds before we fully recover, how can you recover in the traffic pattern....so my instructor continued to show me a spin in which he completly recovered in 220 feet.

Then again, we were purposely not recovering until the spin was fully developed....whereas when he demoed the 220 foot recovery he didnt let it get past the incipient phase........

On a side note, he also demoed what happens when you recover to soon......

We recovered, and were still inverted. haha


Peace out!

Marc

 

[midlifeflyer]

Midlifeflyer: Thanks for your reply. As a CFI part of your authority is to teach spins to other CFI's. Do you feel comfortable when teaching spins to new CFI's?

Good question. I haven't taught new CFIs. I've been asked to but I only teach very part time and don't have the time that I think a CFI should be able to commit in order to teach a new CFI properly.

But I think I can answer your question anyway. Sort of.

No. As of this moment, I would not feel comfortable teaching spins. I have not practiced them on a regular basis and, frankly (my dirty little secret) they don't have the allure to me that many others find.

Were I to make the commitment to start training new CFIs, I would do either one of two things. Either I would either bring myself up to speed so that I did feel comfortable teaching them properly or I would farm the spin training out to a CFI who I knew gave quality spin instruction.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Mastery Of The Airplane

To be honest, it is probably true, as has been pointed out, that whether spins are trained or not, the result is no real change in accident rates. So why teach spins? The answer is the comfort that comes from a greater “Mastery of the Airplane.”

I have seen FAA flight test applicants that are terrified of stalls, especially when entered from a turning maneuver. This is because these pilots are terrified of the possible stall break. And from a turning stall, they believe this may be followed by the greatly feared SPIN.

I have also known students to confide in me that they are terrified of a forced landing because of a lack of confidence in their ability to successfully maneuver an airplane and land on a selected runway, even if directly over an airport.

Both of the above examples show a lack of confidence in that pilot’s ability or a lack of Mastery of the Airplane. But training in both of these situations will prove to the student that both the hard break from a stall or a forced landing over an airport can be successfully concluded 100% of the time as a result of training.

Every military in the world teaches their flight cadets a basic course in aerobatics to include spins and spin recover. This is true for pilot cadets that will be fighter pilots as well as those who will become transport pilots. This is because the military recognizes the important value of teaching Mastery of the Airplane.

To fly an airplane and not feel as the Master of the Airplane is to not fly at all.

 

[Elmer Fud]

Spin Training

I just love spins. It's also a good idea to get a little Conventional Gear (tail wheel) so may so may as well get a little aerobatic training and spins. I agree on a little spin training.

 

[MFRskyknight]

I just love spins. It's also a good idea to get a little Conventional Gear (tail wheel) so may so may as well get a little aerobatic training and spins. I agree on a little spin training.

I did my first spins the other day with an instructor in a 152, I thought it was a blast. Getting my tailwheel endorsement in a Taylorcraft now (w/ some spin training in that as well). Fun fun fun!

While I am over the anxiety of practicing spins, the thought of effing up on the base-to-final and hurtling toward the roof of Wal-Mart is pretty unsettling. Like other have said, it's really up to the individual pilot to seek out not just the proper training, but enough of the proper training to make recoveries 2nd nature. I think a thorough aerobatics course with a very experienced instructor in a less forgiving plane is a great idea.

MFR

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

I did my first spins the other day with an instructor in a 152, I thought it was a blast. I think a thorough aerobatics course with a very experienced instructor in a less forgiving plane is a great idea.

MFR

The best airplane for aerobatics training is the Super Decathlon....

 

[Waldom]

Question to practicing primary flight instructors: How in good conscience can you solo a student that has not been taught to recognize an incipient spin and does not possess the knowledge to recover from one?

I am not a C.F.I., so for me this is an academic question posed to the folks with the most important job in the industry who are out there teaching every day. I know its easy to have an opinion when you don't have to face this complicated issue.

My mother gave over 10,000 hours of primary instruction and she did not teach spins unless requested or to a C.F.I. candidate. My wife also instructed at one time and she always taught spin recognition and recovery pre solo. Neither one ever had a student spin in.

 

[flyingnome]

during the pre-solo training most courses go over the "demonstrated stalls" including the cross controlled stall. when I am demonstrating this I will intentionally put the airplane into at least the incipient stage of the spin, with some I will let a full rotation occur.

after the demonstration I will have the student perform a "power on" stall with out using rudder controls which will lead to the incipient stages of a spin. Bringing the power to idle will correct this action and it is usually a good way of showing a student how to correct a bad situation very easily.

 

[Waldom]

Thanks, Flyingnome, for a clear and concise reply. I can understand how this would teach recognition and avoidance.