Is an SP model 172 authorized for spins? I vaguely remember having to do our training in the older models or a 152.
Fix
What was his aviation background/experience?
The FAA Airman Database says PP/ASEL with an instrument rating.
That's what a BRS system is designed to do after all....Will a BRS save an airplane in a spin?
That's what a BRS system is designed to do after all....
Many aircraft's are fitted with a spin recovery chute during testing for certification.
The idea of spin training is to increase your chances of survival in case of unintentional spin down the lineThat's why this stuff should be performed in a Cessna 150/152 aerobat, When in doubt, let go everything and it rights itself (as long as you have enough alt). You can also fit a BRS system in the 150/172/182. just saying.
And your point is ?? in your initial post you seem to imply that a BRS system couldn't save an aircraft in a spin, I mentioned the spin recovery chute to illustrate the successful deployability of a chute during the spin phase of an aircraft.A spin recovery chute and a BRS are two very different things. A spin chute is installed in the tail, and functions to lower the nose of the aircraft, at which point it is jettisoned and the aircraft recovers to a normal landing.
View attachment 61813
And your point is ?? in your initial post you seem to imply that BRS couldn't save an aircraft in a spin, I mentioned the spin recovery chute to illustrate the successful deployability of a chute during the spin phase of an aircraft.
Interesting read on the traumahawk...The idea of spin training is to increase your chances of survival in case of unintentional spin down the line
Doing it even in a C172 is fairly pointless. If the place I was going to instruct at had Tomahawks, I'd ask for a spin checkout in that
Unlike a one liner in Cessna poh, the Tomahawk is like solid three pages on spin recovery. Don't remember now, but something like "if the spin entry was aggravated by this, the spin will look like that, and expect to need to do as follows to recover"Interesting read on the traumahawk...
Tomahawk Revisited - Aviation Safety
Piper's Tomahawk has been criticized for its stall-spin behavior. How does it compare with other spins-approved airplanes?www.aviationsafetymagazine.com
I remember in my old training days, there was a rental tomahawk (cheapest aircraft at the FBO), my CFI jokingly said "No we're not dying in this thing".Unlike a one liner in Cessna poh, the Tomahawk is like solid three pages on spin recovery. Don't remember now, but something like "if the spin entry was aggravated by this, the spin will look like that, and expect to need to do as follows to recover"
It was my first "grown up" airplane after getting my private. Check myself out in it after reading a book because no CFIs in sight type deal. Maybe that's why, but I actually loved that plane. 50 rpm over idle = greaser every damn time. Overall good memoriesI remember in my old training days, there was a rental tomahawk (cheapest aircraft at the FBO), my CFI jokingly said "No we're not dying in this thing".
I spent more moolah and never questioned him. He is the reason I don't have a single min logged in that model.
It was my first "grown up" airplane after getting my private. Check myself out in it after reading a book because no CFIs in sight type deal. Maybe that's why, but I actually loved that plane. 50 rpm over idle = greaser every damn time. Overall good memories
Agreed, but not as good as the 150/152 in my recollection, although I willingly admit ancient familiarity biases my opinion.The Tomahawk and Beech Skipper, are good planes.
As far as looking around at your aircraft inflight, if you ever find yourself in an R-22 don't look up through the moonroof at the mast. Ever.Like the 177, I rented the Traumahawk because no one else did, and I could fly it pretty much whenever I wanted. Plus even then I liked weird, maligned garbage. I did spin it, once, and it did what it said on the tin and ACTUALLY SPAN. No trouble recovering. Of course, this was long after they'd added a rib or two in the wings to prevent them from bending in to a rather ehm "unrecoverable" aerodynamic shape. Or so goes the rumor.
I would definitely advise not looking at the tail when you stall it, though. Thing looks like it's waving at you. As in "bye-bye".
Edit: It was so much more comfortable than a 150/52 for a long cross-country, too. You were actually sitting in a seat that was human-sized, your legs weren't at an 80 degree angle, and you weren't ALWAYS swapping shoulder-sweat with whoever was in the other seat. I say this as someone who was at the time 5'10 and ~140lbs. How anyone much bigger than I am suffers through hundreds of hours in a 150/52 is beyond me.