Spins...

[PropsForward]

This is the quote you quoted.
Now......if you don't consider the recovery to be part of the maneuver, I'd like to know where you fly and the next time that you plan on doing a spin so that I can bring my camera! And before you go on with your broken record routine about how we're all more interested in flaming you than we are in adressing the question at hand, perhaps you should reread your own post...the one where you countered what the guy who was passing good info....was saying.

Not quite sure what you are upset about. In the 172 Va is around 99-105, and flap speed is lower. If you're going to be doing intentional spins with the flaps extended, then you need to perform the maneuver (which includes recovery) within the most limiting speed. In the case of an intentional spin with full flaps it will be lower than Va.

 

[avbug]

Yeah, you misunderstood me. The question at hand was the concern that flaps reduce rudder effectiveness. They do not. They reduce aileron effectiveness so in regard to spins, the amount of flaps does not matter since you use opposite rudder to recover from a spin.

I was not implying to ever use ailerson in spin recovery. This is bad, it can can delay or prevent a spin recovery. It can lead to a flat spin.

Flaps reduce aileron effectiveness? Since when? Flaps are far more likely to reduce rudder effectiveness than aileron effectiveness. More importantly with respect to spin dynamics, rudder is only part of the equation, and flaps have the effect of both recuding aiflow over the rudder and horizontal stab, and alterning the download on the horizontal stab. Flaps can have a massive effect, recovery proceedures notwithstanding, on the spin dynamics themselves...very small things can have very big consequences on spin dynamics.

Be careful stipulating which controls do what in spin recovery. Only some aircraft use rudder. Others do use aileron, some into the spin, some against it. Look to the proceedures for the specific aircraft in it's specific configuration in question in any given case, because the proceedures do vary greatly.

 

[Uncle Sparky]

Was there some particular day in recent history in which a boatload of airplane scrap metal rained down, of which I am not aware? Or is it that inflight breakups have come to a grinding halt?

AvWeb
December 13, 2000
Malibu Mirage: The Ultimate Piston Single?

Between May 1989 and March 1991, the PA-46 suffered a string of seven fatal accidents, and the airplane became the unhappy target of an intensive investigation by the FAA and NTSB. The thought was that the airplane was somehow flawed and breaking up in flight due to design problems.......... Structural analysis demonstrated that the wings would flutter at 600 knots and the tail at about 1,000 knots. To put that in perspective, Vne is 198 KIAS. The airplane passed every other test with ease, including out-of-trim tests and tests of G forces at speeds as high as 200 KIAS, which is 40 knots higher than required......... The problem turns out to be pilot training. The study indicated that many pilots moving into a Mirage often do not have sufficient respect for the complexity of this type of high-performance aircraft nor the harsh environment of the flight levels.

....been hiding in a cave have we?

I suppose you've never heard of the "FORK TAILED DOCTOR KILLER" either.... the Model 35 Bonanza...."250 in-flight breakups between the beginning of production(1947) and the present". Remember Ritchie Valens?

There's nothing wrong with your info and emphasis on dynamics of a spin. And the last paragraph of your last post is good info as well. The FAA circular that I obtained my quote from began with a disclaimer which resembles the same message....general spin recovery techniques are good, but consult your AOM first. BUT... instruction on and information regarding a proper recovery should also be emphasized. How many "spiral" incidents started out as a stall/spin. If you recover from a spin without leveling the wings first, what will happen next? Most of these in-flight break-ups are due to the "graveyard spiral", but how many of these inexperienced guys trained in a highly forgiving trainer, without being taught all of the dangers and pitfalls of the stall/spin and then in turn hopped in a high performance single?

 

[avbug]

You cite an unauthoritative article which describes a design problem attributed to stupid pilots. What on earth has that to do with recovery following a spin? Any airplane, malibu, mirage, cessna 210, bonanza, or citation is going to break up if you push it hard enough...none of that changes the fact that no undue forces occur in a spin that are damaging, or serve to cause the design to overspeed. None.

The recovery occurs after the spin is over. Done, finished, kaput, past tense, history. A proper recovery does not lead to an overspeed, and for most designs that spin with flaps down, part of the recovery proceedure is retracting the flaps. Else a recovery may never be effected.

A bat cave? No. And yes, I do remember Ritchie Valens. Do YOU?

Fork tailed doctor killer? Did you just start in aviation? Is that something you picked out of a magazine somewhere?

Yes, the Bonanza has had a number of breakups, and it's been accompanied by a number of AD's. So what? Very few of those involved spins, incidentally, or spin recoveries. Further, the airplane isn't certificated for spins, so what on earth is your point? That we should start providing spin recovery training in Bonanza's?

Graveyard spirals break airplanes. Spins do NOT. What again, is your point???

 

[Uncle Sparky]

. What again, is your point???

.....at the moment? I hope you fly in an airplane that only requires one pilot. And if someone does have to spend many hours confined in a cramped space with a stressball like you....Gawd help em! That's the only point I can come up with at the moment! Good night and good luck.

 

[A Squared]

I suppose you've never heard of the "FORK TAILED DOCTOR KILLER" either.... the Model 35 Bonanza...."250 in-flight breakups between the beginning of production(1947) and the present". Remember Ritchie Valens?

Not that it's particularly relevant to the discussion at hand, but Ritchie Valens (and Buddy Holly, and JP Richardson) were killed after a departure into low IFR conditions, about 5 miles from the airport. From all appearences the airplane flew into the ground in a steep bank. From the CAB report of the accident: "There was no evidence of inflight structural failure or failure of the controls."

 

[minitour]

Not that it's particularly relevant to the discussionat hand, but Ritchie Valens (and Buddy Holly, and JP Richardson) werekilled after a departure into low IFR conditions, about 5 miles fromthe airport. From all appearences the airplane flew into the ground ina steep bank. From the CAB report of the accident: "There was noevidence of inflight structural failure or failure of thecontrols."

CFIT?

 

[350DRIVER]

Sparko,

Why the anger?. You may want to review the accident reports and what was found out after the fact prior to attempting to just throw things together that really don't mix, as A Squared has already pointed out. Opinion is much different than fact my friend.

Just a suggestion, may help your argument out if that is at all possible.

3 5 0

 

[A Squared]

CFIT?

No, I don't think so, generally CFIT implies tooling along, in complete control of the airplane and thundering into some dirt you had no idea was there. In this crash, the evidence suggests that the pilot was not able to control the plane by reference to instruments. THe pilot was no instrument rated, and the attitude Gyro was found caged, which suggests that it may have been caged during the flight. Non-insrument rated pilot, possible partial panel, dark night, loss of control at low altitude.

 

[avbug]

.....at the moment? I hope you fly in an airplane that only requires one pilot. And if someone does have to spend many hours confined in a cramped space with a stressball like you....Gawd help em! .

Thank you indeed for your judgemental professionalism. Very on-topic, and consistent with the logic displayed thus far.

That's the only point I can come up with at the moment!

That's pretty much what I thought. Thanks for playing.