Should spins be put back on PTS for private?

[BobDDuck]

I had spins demonstrated to me on my very first lesson as PPL. I think that is a little extreme, but I do feel like they should be shown early own. However, I DON'T think they should be part of the PTS and hence a requirement for students to demonstrate on a checkride.

 

[ppragman]

I had spins demonstrated to me on my very first lesson as PPL. I think that is a little extreme, but I do feel like they should be shown early own. However, I DON'T think they should be part of the PTS and hence a requirement for students to demonstrate on a checkride.

Not part of the PTS, but they should be demonstrated and have a log book endorsement that the student has experienced spins prior to being eligible for the check ride.

 

[kellwolf]

I was scared to death of spins until I took a spin training course right before working on my commercial. Once I was in my first one it was like "What was I freaked out about? You can get out of these."

A lot of the "spin avoidance" teaching puts so much emphasis on how spins can kill you, that I think it unfairly terrifies some pilots. I had one PPL student that when I told him I was gonna demo a spin, he broke out in a cold sweat and started telling my how John and Martha King said they were Really Bad.

I think all PPL should at least SEE a spin and recover from one. That teaching alongside the spin avoidance training currently in place is a much better way to do it. I don't think it should be in the PTS (since that is the stuff demonstrated on a checkride), but I do think it should be in the syllabus.

 

[B767Driver]

In theory, I think it's a good idea. I don't think it's very practical, however. Low wing Piper models are notorious for flat spin characteristics and IMO should never be spun. It's my understanding that the military does not spin fighter jets for this same reason...(fighter guys...correct me if I have inaccurate info.)

Finding a suitable airplane to conduct the training may be impossible for some PPL applicants.

Don't get me wrong...I think it would be desirable for all pilots to take some sort of advanced maneuvering/aerobatic type of course. In fact, at 12,000 hours I could really use some refresher in this type of flying. The airline environment conducts upset recover training...but I could really benefit from some more.

I think a likely impetus would be for the industry to somehow convince underwriters to give hefty premium break for someone who has completed an advanced maneuvering course or something to that effect.

Another idea would be to "test out of" the stall/spin portion of the practical test for applicants who show completion of an approved course during the checkride evaluation.

 

[PaulRix]

I did a spin training lesson as part of the private pilot syllabus while stationed in Cyprus back in '95. I'll be honest, I learned little from the experience except that I certainly don't want to enter one inadvertently, especially at pattern altitude. Frankly, that lesson from 13 years ago hardly makes me proficient at spin recovery. Personally I think that spin avoidance, slow flight and recovery from unusual attitudes should be taught thoroughly, with the instructor emphasizing the circumstances where a spin could potentially be induced inadvertently. If the student wants to go further with it then that is fine (assuming that the instructor is fully proficient at the maneuver themselves)...

Since first learning to fly I can honestly say I have not once come close to inadvertently stalling, let alone entering a spin.

 

[Michael95U]

Not part of the PTS, but they should be demonstrated and have a log book endorsement that the student has experienced spins prior to being eligible for the check ride.

:yeahthat:

It would be next to impossible to make every PPL candidate demonstrate spins on their check ride. When you look at the training fleet, a lot of the aircraft cannot do intentional spins. So making it a required part of the PPL curriculum is prudent. No spin training logbook endorsement would be needed if it was added to the list of items required to be taught to a PPL student.

Michael

 

[surreal1221]

Put back on the PTS?

Anyone care to show me the PPL PTS that had spins recoverings on them? Not spin awareness...but actual demonstrating a spin and recovering along with the specific standards that needed to be met.

Thanks.

Now, to the question at hand.

No, they should not be on the PTS in any other capacity than what is already required. What should be required though is an endorsement from an authorized instructor stating that the student has demonstrated spin recoveries to a satisfactory point.

Then again in CFI training.

 

[Inverted25]

I am really enjoying getting so much input from other pilots and instructors on this topic. Now I do agree that most unintentional spins do happen in the traffic pattern usually on the base to final turn when someone tries to compensate for being to close on the downwind by overbanking and not using proper rudder input so your really to low to do much. But I forget who said it but it does NOT take 1000 feet to recover even from a fully developed spin. Many of you agree that it should be at least shown but not required during the practical test. When it used to be required for the PPL did you just have to have a logbook endorsement like you do for your CFI or was it actually a required performance item during the checkride? A few of you have mentioned that more stick and rudder techinques need to be taught and I fully agree. I personally think that you should have to do at least part of your training in a tailwheel plane to learn true stick and rudder flying. Now I understand this isnt realstic because many people may not have access to one but its just a thought. Lets put another spin on this thread though. Do you think IFR students should be shown how to recover from a spin while under the hood. I personally do yet havent ever heard of it being done. My reasoning for this is there are many situation during IFR flight for which you could easily be put into a spin situation. The one that comes to my mind is if you make the unforunate decision to wonder to close to a thunderstorm. When I did my inital IFR ticket I did steep turns and stalls under the hood but never spins but I always thought it would be benefical. What do you guys think?

 

[Inverted25]

surreal it used to be on the PTS back in the 70's. But i'm not sure if it was a required logbook endorsment or required maneuver on the practical.

 

[tgrayson]

surreal it used to be on the PTS back in the 70's. But i'm not sure if it was a required logbook endorsement or required maneuver on the practical.

Er, it was removed from PPL training in 1949. That was probably prior to the PTS era, which is most likely Surreal's point.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

I would rather not teach full spins. I would prefer the students stall it uncoordinated and recover keep the spin from occurring then letting it go to a full spin, just to show them what to look for when a spin is imminent. I doubt they will have time to recover from a real spin as they turn base to final.

 

[juxtapilot]

I think everyone should be required to do spins during PPL training. My instructor took me up to do spins towards the end of my PPL training. It put in to perspective how important being coordinated is, and if anything, scared me into controlling the airplane properly. The most important thing I learned from my spin flight was not the recovery; it was recognizing a condition where a spin could occur.

 

[Hacker15e]

it does NOT take 1000 feet to recover even from a fully developed spin.

Completely depends on the aircraft, so qualify a statement like this with what type of aircraft you're talking about.

 

[Rizer]

I hope you CFI's that are spinning your primary students are wearing parachutes and have your students wearing one as well.

 

[Inverted25]

Hacker your right it does depend upon the airplane being used. Most of my spin time comes in the cessna family of aircraft. In a three turn spin I would estimate on average we lost 400-600 feet. In all seriouness though besides the cessna 140, 150/152 tend to enter a spiral dive instead of a true spin. Seems like alot of people on here keep mentioning they would rather teach spin awareness instead. I dont advocate getting rid of teaching spin awarness I just think that the final step of spin awareness training should be the demostration of a spin to show what can happen when things do go wrong. Imagine this situation, you have a PPL out practing slow flight and approach to landing stalls, right as he approaches the stall point a gust of wind strike the aircraft from the side causing it to break to the right as it stalls and begin to enter a spin. Now proper spin awareness training should kick in and he should be able to apply proper corrections before the spin is fully developed. But say this is the first time this PPL practiced stalls since his checkride over a year ago. So it catches him off guard and he doesn't apply proper controls in time and enters a spin. These are the type of situations that I beleive alittle spin training would benefit. Another reason I am a firm beleiver in spin training is that too many PPL that I talk to are scared to death of spins. Because of this they never truley learn to fly their aircraft to it limits because they are afriad of entering into a situation a spin could happen. One of the best sayings I have heard is " you havent truley experienced the freedom of flight until you have learned how to recover from everytype of spin allowing you to fully explore the potentional of flight"-Bill Stein Simply put I think too many PPL fall into a comfort zone where they dont truley understand the potentional of their airplanes. Just my two cents though.

 

[Inverted25]

In a letter from the FAA it states that spin given by a CFI was acceptable without parachutes. FAR 91.307 (d)(2) "spins and other flight maneuvers required for a certificate or rating..." can be interpreted to mean spin training given by a CFI, even for non CFI flight instruction, can be done without a parachute. This was a letter presented at a CFI refresher clinic.

Now that being said it is almost careless not to wear parachutes. My instructor when I learned to fly told me of a friend he lost when his rudder became locked in full deflection during a recovery from a spin. Therefore if I am giving spin instruction me and the student will both be wearing pilot emergency parachutes. Same single chute units worn by skydive pilots.

 

[Holocene]

Where I rent a 172, the chief instructor said he would not allow spin demonstrations in his planes due to "abuse" of the attitude indicator.

 

[mattp1803]

I am really enjoying getting so much input from other pilots and instructors on this topic. Now I do agree that most unintentional spins do happen in the traffic pattern usually on the base to final turn when someone tries to compensate for being to close on the downwind by overbanking and not using proper rudder input so your really to low to do much. But I forget who said it but it does NOT take 1000 feet to recover even from a fully developed spin. Many of you agree that it should be at least shown but not required during the practical test. When it used to be required for the PPL did you just have to have a logbook endorsement like you do for your CFI or was it actually a required performance item during the checkride? A few of you have mentioned that more stick and rudder techinques need to be taught and I fully agree. I personally think that you should have to do at least part of your training in a tailwheel plane to learn true stick and rudder flying. Now I understand this isnt realstic because many people may not have access to one but its just a thought. Lets put another spin on this thread though. Do you think IFR students should be shown how to recover from a spin while under the hood. I personally do yet havent ever heard of it being done. My reasoning for this is there are many situation during IFR flight for which you could easily be put into a spin situation. The one that comes to my mind is if you make the unforunate decision to wonder to close to a thunderstorm. When I did my inital IFR ticket I did steep turns and stalls under the hood but never spins but I always thought it would be benefical. What do you guys think?

My instructor used to always tell me it took 1,000 feet to recover. It always did seem a little dramatic, but I guess I took his word for it. Do you or does anyone here know how many feet it takes to recover a full developed spin? I'm curious on this one.

 

[WacoFan]

My instructor used to always tell me it took 1,000 feet to recover. It always did seem a little dramatic, but I guess I took his word for it. Do you or does anyone here know how many feet it takes to recover a full developed spin? I'm curious on this one.

I would hink it is less than 1,000 feet. I would also think it would depend upon the airplane you are spinning, wouldn't it?

 

[t-cart]

I would hink it is less than 1,000 feet. I would also think it would depend upon the airplane you are spinning, wouldn't it?

And to add to this, I would think recovery time,ie. altitude lost, would depend on whether the spin was entered intentionally or not. Lots of difference in knowing something's coming versus a surprise situation. ( Practicing spins vs. Screwing up)