Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
Do either of you have any data on this, or are you just pulling it out of your rectums?
Spin training for CFIs
- Thread starter Blackhawk
- Start date
Do either of you have any data on this, or are you just pulling it out of your rectums?
R
Roger, Roger
Guest
I'm pulling it out of my rectum. I have no idea if those are anywhere close to numbers 1-2-3, but I know that those three seem to be the ones I hear about when I read stuff like AOPA safety seminars, accident reports, etc.
I sourced the information on a link at the bottom. The probability was calculated and posted, I can post the work if you like.
I tried to verify Rogers information by reading through the NTSB's annual statistical analysis from 03/04/05. I was unable to verify the information, so I didn't post on it. I don't think it is accurate though and will continue to look for something to verify that. You can find the NTSB statistic reports here: http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/A_Stat.htm
R
Roger, Roger
Guest
The 2008 Joseph Nall report (http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/08nall.pdf) shows the following:
Accidents with the highest number of fatalities:
1. Maneuvering
Typical maneuvering accidents occur for one or
more of the following reasons:
• Stall or Loss of Control – Loss of airspeed during
the maneuvering can result in a stall/spin or
other loss of control.
• Wire Strikes and Structure Impacts – If maneuvering
is conducted at extremely low altitudes, collisions
with wires or other structures is likely.
• Mountain or Canyon Impacts – Terrain impact
is another possible result when maneuvering at
very low altitudes.
• Aerobatics – Conducting aerobatics with improper
training or equipment, or at unsafe altitudes,
is a high-risk operation.
2. "other"
3. Weather
Weather accidents, though a small number of the total, are by far the most likely to be lethal, according to the Nall data.
I was wrong on fuel management-it is a relatively small percentage of both all accidents and fatal accidents.
Accidents with the highest number of fatalities:
1. Maneuvering
Typical maneuvering accidents occur for one or
more of the following reasons:
• Stall or Loss of Control – Loss of airspeed during
the maneuvering can result in a stall/spin or
other loss of control.
• Wire Strikes and Structure Impacts – If maneuvering
is conducted at extremely low altitudes, collisions
with wires or other structures is likely.
• Mountain or Canyon Impacts – Terrain impact
is another possible result when maneuvering at
very low altitudes.
• Aerobatics – Conducting aerobatics with improper
training or equipment, or at unsafe altitudes,
is a high-risk operation.
2. "other"
3. Weather
Weather accidents, though a small number of the total, are by far the most likely to be lethal, according to the Nall data.
I was wrong on fuel management-it is a relatively small percentage of both all accidents and fatal accidents.
If you happen to stumble on statistics for each, would you post them? That is what I was looking for. The reports I linked have the information you gave, but just like your link they are broad. I would love to see a breakdown the categories with the percent occurrence of each.
Say hi to John for me. I did my spin training with him a month or so ago. This Pitts was a blast to fly.
Spin training is great, but like with any maneuver training it can get predictable. What surprised me the most was when we did the base to final cross controlled stall. When the spin happened it was a much faster roll into a tight rotation that took me a few turns to get it right. With the standard hard rudder at the break spin it seemed I knew what the aircraft was doing and going to do. I can see how deadly that can be.
ozziecat35
4 out of 5 great lakes prefer Michigan.
Not a CFI by any means, but I can say I think it would be helpful to be at least introduced to spins at the PPL level. I think if your CFI can show you how violent they are, you have a greater respect for them in stalls and when low/slow...
I have a PPL and an Instrument, just over a 100 hours, and have never even been close to a spin....You can read about proper spin recovery all you want, but to a new pilot, if all of a sudden thrust into that situation, what's the likelyhood of recalling the proper recovery procedures, unless you've actually done it in a controlled environment?
My 2 little pennies.
I have a PPL and an Instrument, just over a 100 hours, and have never even been close to a spin....You can read about proper spin recovery all you want, but to a new pilot, if all of a sudden thrust into that situation, what's the likelyhood of recalling the proper recovery procedures, unless you've actually done it in a controlled environment?
My 2 little pennies.
juskl
Well-Known Member
We need to teach CFI's to not be affraid of stalls. How do we do this? Can't tell you how many times I have been told by students that previous CFI's that they flew with told them that "they hated stalls, would never do turning stalls do to getting in a spin, etc. etc..."
We do it by requiring experience in all stalls, as well as spins. To make the CFI attend training on how to teach someone how to get into a stall, what happens when yaw is introduced, what the spin is, and how to get out of it. By teaching, we become experts in our field, and knowing it ad nausium. So the FAA put out the spin endrosement to demonstrate instructional proficiency... Trust me when I say that by the time you get that endorsement (with a school and instructors that specialize in this), your understanding is much better, as is your skill set. So that you understand and have experience to then teach basic manuevers (MCA, all stalls, etc...) and are able to far recognize a bad situation before it happens. You can also impart that knowledge to your students.
Are you going to go out and teach spins right away? Not if you are smart you are not. But you are going to be a more knowledgeable instructor and hopefully a better one.
Yesterday I did a CFI spin endorsement and the lesson went about 1.3 hours after an hour of ground. Total spin sets was about 14. The final part is the Base to final spin entry scenario. In which (in the Great Lakes) we lost routinely about 700 or so feet by the time we recovered. It is obvious that ,though at altitude a great lesson as to how it happens, at about 400 or so feet above the ground, it is fatal.. No doubt about it..
But the premise is to teach the CFI candidate how it happens and to hopefully recognize the situation long before it happens. Bells and Whistles should be going off in their head long before the bad scenario occurs. So that they not only can save the day, but also so that they can teach their students how to aviod and recognize a bad situation and then correctly not allow it to happen.
But as has been said many times (including me), get this endorsement at a location that specializes in doing spin endorsements, in aircraft that are built for this. You don't have to spend thousands either. There are several schools out there. In the Phoenix area we are one of those. Come see us in Chandler at www.aerobatics.com. If not, please go somewhere that does this routinely with experienced pilots that are good teachers.
I love teaching aerobatics and spin training. More importantly, I love it when the light goes on in a students head and they get it. They understand. If what I have taught, can be put forth to someday prevent someone from doing something fatal, then I couldn't ask for more. Fly safe all..
We do it by requiring experience in all stalls, as well as spins. To make the CFI attend training on how to teach someone how to get into a stall, what happens when yaw is introduced, what the spin is, and how to get out of it. By teaching, we become experts in our field, and knowing it ad nausium. So the FAA put out the spin endrosement to demonstrate instructional proficiency... Trust me when I say that by the time you get that endorsement (with a school and instructors that specialize in this), your understanding is much better, as is your skill set. So that you understand and have experience to then teach basic manuevers (MCA, all stalls, etc...) and are able to far recognize a bad situation before it happens. You can also impart that knowledge to your students.
Are you going to go out and teach spins right away? Not if you are smart you are not. But you are going to be a more knowledgeable instructor and hopefully a better one.
Yesterday I did a CFI spin endorsement and the lesson went about 1.3 hours after an hour of ground. Total spin sets was about 14. The final part is the Base to final spin entry scenario. In which (in the Great Lakes) we lost routinely about 700 or so feet by the time we recovered. It is obvious that ,though at altitude a great lesson as to how it happens, at about 400 or so feet above the ground, it is fatal.. No doubt about it..
But the premise is to teach the CFI candidate how it happens and to hopefully recognize the situation long before it happens. Bells and Whistles should be going off in their head long before the bad scenario occurs. So that they not only can save the day, but also so that they can teach their students how to aviod and recognize a bad situation and then correctly not allow it to happen.
But as has been said many times (including me), get this endorsement at a location that specializes in doing spin endorsements, in aircraft that are built for this. You don't have to spend thousands either. There are several schools out there. In the Phoenix area we are one of those. Come see us in Chandler at www.aerobatics.com. If not, please go somewhere that does this routinely with experienced pilots that are good teachers.
I love teaching aerobatics and spin training. More importantly, I love it when the light goes on in a students head and they get it. They understand. If what I have taught, can be put forth to someday prevent someone from doing something fatal, then I couldn't ask for more. Fly safe all..
escapepilot
Well-Known Member
I expect this to get some feathers ruffled, but IMO, the FAA places too much emphasis on a CFI canidates teaching ability and not enough on their flying ability. Not only must we be good and effective teachers, but we should have the skills necessary to allow our students to make mistakes and either the student or ourselves, recovery safely.
A CFI that is afraid of stalls should have never been given the CFI Cert.
A CFI that is afraid of stalls should have never been given the CFI Cert.
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
This is why I didn't become a CFI. I was signed off for the checkride, and got a non-CFI job and said screw it. No way in hell do I want to be riding around in the right seat for the next 500hrs, most of the time not flying. No way. CFI-ing is good for a lot of things, and I know a lot of guys who came out as outstanding pilots. That said, its an unpopular position to take, but I firmly believe that I learned more about flying (not necessarily regs and procedure and mistakes that people commonly make because I wasn't observing them) in my 250hrs after my commercial by having a job flying than I would have had I CFI'd during that time. Now, things are a little different, and I might go back and get my CFIs eventually, but honestly, as good an experience as CFI'ing is, long VFR cross countries across desolate parts of Alaska with strict deadlines and difficult conditions gave me judgment (nearly at the cost of my dumb ass in some situations) that I don't think I would have gotten elsewhere.
jrh
Well-Known Member
Funny you should say that, because I've thought the direct opposite on many occasions. I've met a lot of CFIs who are fine pilots, yet mediocre to poor teachers.
Completely agree.
jrh
Well-Known Member
I won't argue with anything there. It sounds like the job you got has given you plenty of good quality experience.
...says the guy who's never been a CFI.
That's like me saying being a CFI is better than flying freight in Alaska. The fact is, I've never flown freight in Alaska, so I don't really know what I'd learn from it. Maybe it teaches lessons better than CFIing, maybe it doesn't. I can't say for sure without doing it.
But I am able to say this...CFIs get plenty of experience with deadlines and difficult conditions, at least if they have much "hustle" in the way they work. Deadlines come from the customers' training schedules. Difficult conditions come from trying to decide how they're going to accomplish the training objective around the weather. All of the go/no-go decisions you make as a VFR freight pilot are made by CFIs for lessons. The standards get bumped up for CFIIs teaching in actual IMC.
I can't tell you how many times I've stewed over the weather an hour before a flight, trying to decide if I should call the customer and cancel or not. I treat each lesson with the same urgency for completion that you treat your freight runs. Your clients want their cargo and my clients want their training.
What is the ceiling like? How much are these pop-up thunderstorms going to develop? How fast is this weather moving in? What is the freezing level? What are the tops? Can we get on top to do VFR maneuvers? Is SVFR an option? What are my options for diverting? I can't think of any scenarios a freight pilot would have to deal with that a CFI wouldn't, other than the fact that a freight pilot might have to make *more* decisions, simply because they're flying a higher number of trips per day.
R
Roger, Roger
Guest
Flying a plane and teaching are almost entirely different skillsets. A CFI needs both. Though I agree with JRH, I'd go with teaching being the more-often-neglected skillset among CFIs today. I know it was my weaker area as a new CFI.
Yup. Good CFIs don't just see "OVC012" in the METAR and automatically cancel the flight. We work through every possible avenue to get the flight done safely and productively. Learning takes place both when we succeed (wow, we got our multi maneuvers done VFR on top AND an actual IMC approach simulated single engine!) and when we fail (well, that was worthless...we just spent 1.4 getting a SVFR clearance, flying to the outlying field, and trying to do touch and goes while dodging the clouds in class G with a student pilot who was too overwhelmed to learn anything).