Spins on primary training

[MidlifeFlyer]

I think the main reason for this is to dumb it down so the common person can understand it. A guy came in our airport the other day and asked if we practiced stalls and how easy it was to restart the engine. Are you gonna tell him that a stall is when the flight path exceeds the critical angle of attack and him leaving like without a clue of what you just said? or just explain that there is insufficient air going over the wings to provide lift? I dont know..

Unfortunately, the number of =pilots= who think it means "too slow" suggests it's not just for the "common person."

When asked by a non-pilot, I first ask if they sail. If they do it's easy since the concept is similar (in the opposite direction a sailor was trying to teach me how to handle the sail - after my not getting it a few times, she finally said, "it's a airfoil!" Bingo!).

Otherwise, I pretty much use my hand as an airfoil and change it's AoA and describe what happens when it exceed critical, avoiding using speed as part of the description.

 

[shdw]

Caution on doing spin training: If your aircraft is NOT certified for spins (meaning it is utility or normal category with a tag saying no spins) then in flight testing for airworthiness the aircraft has only had to recover from a 1 turn incepient spin. This means if your student for instance starts the spin gets half way around and decides (unknowingly) to apply full aileron against the spin he can possibly get your aircraft into a full blown spin by further stalling the inside wing possibly leaving you in an unrecoverable situation. Another issue may be the student recovers from the primary incipient spin but goes to far and enters a secondary spin in the opposite direction, these tend to be incredibly vicious and will likely (if you havn't seen them before) scare the living **** out of you.

That being said I have spun most of the Cessna trainers used currently and have never seen them enter a fully developed spin (including doing secondary spins just to try and make it develop). So the likelyhood that it will develop is slim, however it can happen and if your CG is just a little into that normal range (no spins ever allowed in normal category that I have heard of) and you get into a fully devoloped spin I will be praying for you.

That being said, I fully believe in spin training though I don't believe it is necessary for the primary student and i certainly don't think an instructor with a 1 hour spin lesson from their CFI training should be teaching them. The spin isn't what is killing pilots, misuse of primary flight controls at low altitude causing them to enter a spin is what is killing them. So the point is, teach them how to avoid entering a spin making sure they have a thorough understanding of each of the flight controls and how they work will be much more beneficial to the primary student then learning how to recover from a spin which if they experience on will probably happen under 1000 feet and no spin training in the world will help you then.

 

[t-cart]

Caution on doing spin training: If your aircraft is NOT certified for spins (meaning it is utility or normal category with a tag saying no spins) then in flight testing for airworthiness the aircraft has only had to recover from a 1 turn incepient spin. This means if your student for instance starts the spin gets half way around and decides (unknowingly) to apply full aileron against the spin he can possibly get your aircraft into a full blown spin by further stalling the inside wing possibly leaving you in an unrecoverable situation. Another issue may be the student recovers from the primary incipient spin but goes to far and enters a secondary spin in the opposite direction, these tend to be incredibly vicious and will likely (if you havn't seen them before) scare the living **** out of you.

That being said I have spun most of the Cessna trainers used currently and have never seen them enter a fully developed spin (including doing secondary spins just to try and make it develop). So the likelyhood that it will develop is slim, however it can happen and if your CG is just a little into that normal range (no spins ever allowed in normal category that I have heard of) and you get into a fully devoloped spin I will be praying for you.

That being said, I fully believe in spin training though I don't believe it is necessary for the primary student and i certainly don't think an instructor with a 1 hour spin lesson from their CFI training should be teaching them. The spin isn't what is killing pilots, misuse of primary flight controls at low altitude causing them to enter a spin is what is killing them. So the point is, teach them how to avoid entering a spin making sure they have a thorough understanding of each of the flight controls and how they work will be much more beneficial to the primary student then learning how to recover from a spin which if they experience on will probably happen under 1000 feet and no spin training in the world will help you then.

Most of the guys participating in this thread have been instructing a pretty good while.

Oh, Welcome to J.C.

 

[Blackhawk]

Caution on doing spin training: If your aircraft is NOT certified for spins (meaning it is utility or normal category with a tag saying no spins) then in flight testing for airworthiness the aircraft has only had to recover from a 1 turn incepient spin. This means if your student for instance starts the spin gets half way around and decides (unknowingly) to apply full aileron against the spin he can possibly get your aircraft into a full blown spin by further stalling the inside wing possibly leaving you in an unrecoverable situation. Another issue may be the student recovers from the primary incipient spin but goes to far and enters a secondary spin in the opposite direction, these tend to be incredibly vicious and will likely (if you havn't seen them before) scare the living **** out of you.

That being said I have spun most of the Cessna trainers used currently and have never seen them enter a fully developed spin (including doing secondary spins just to try and make it develop). So the likelyhood that it will develop is slim, however it can happen and if your CG is just a little into that normal range (no spins ever allowed in normal category that I have heard of) and you get into a fully devoloped spin I will be praying for you.

That being said, I fully believe in spin training though I don't believe it is necessary for the primary student and i certainly don't think an instructor with a 1 hour spin lesson from their CFI training should be teaching them. The spin isn't what is killing pilots, misuse of primary flight controls at low altitude causing them to enter a spin is what is killing them. So the point is, teach them how to avoid entering a spin making sure they have a thorough understanding of each of the flight controls and how they work will be much more beneficial to the primary student then learning how to recover from a spin which if they experience on will probably happen under 1000 feet and no spin training in the world will help you then.

1. My spin training for CFIs is normally 3 hops- as you pointed out the endorsement says I have found the person in question proficient to teach spins.
2. Spin training, among other things, should include common spin scenarios, the aerodynamics involved in the spin, incipient spin recognition. I agree that full spin training will not save you if you let a spin fully develop in a traffic pattern; where it might save you is if you get good spin training you might be able to recognize the incipient spin and recover, or even better, recognize possible spin scenarios and avoid them.
3. Any time you train in a new model, or train someone in a model you have not flown, read up on the stall/spin characteristics. There are some SEL airplanes out there that I take to 3000'+ before doing stalls.

 

[shdw]

1. My spin training for CFIs is normally 3 hops- as you pointed out the endorsement says I have found the person in question proficient to teach spins.
2. Spin training, among other things, should include common spin scenarios, the aerodynamics involved in the spin, incipient spin recognition. I agree that full spin training will not save you if you let a spin fully develop in a traffic pattern; where it might save you is if you get good spin training you might be able to recognize the incipient spin and recover, or even better, recognize possible spin scenarios and avoid them.
3. Any time you train in a new model, or train someone in a model you have not flown, read up on the stall/spin characteristics. There are some SEL airplanes out there that I take to 3000'+ before doing stalls.

"3 hops?" I believe you are agreeing only 1 hour then? Personally my CFI spin training was a joke and if it was all the training I had I certainly wouldn't attempt to teach spins. Treat spin training like flying IFR, you certainly don't think 3 hours of instrument is enough to fly safely IMC, why would anyone think 3 hours or less spin training has you ready? What if your student recovers by throwing the nose forward too early and throws you inverted? Even worse what if he/she throws the stick forward hard while stomping hard opposite rudder and enters a secondary fully developed inverted spin? Would a CFI with 3 hours of spin training be able to safely recover and could the aircraft handle that load? There are too many dangers for little to no benefit for the primary student.

"Fully develop in the traffic pattern" First off as stated previously most trainers won't full develop and almost any aircraft when spun will loose nearly 1000 feet if perfectly recovered. So if your argueing that you can recover in a traffic pattern go speak with some aerobatic pilots and let them give you a little insight on how wrong this is.

Finally number 3 I agree completely but don't see the relevance to this topic.

The overall point is that spin training isn't important for a primary student because where they spin (in the pattern) is going to kill them if it happens. It is better to teach the primary student avoidance, not recovery. Where spin training pays off is for IFR as unusual attitudes from disorientation in a cloud can leave you exiting a cloud in a spin where proper training will save you from stupidly spinning in from 10,000 feet or whatever altitude you are cruising at.

 

[Blackhawk]

"3 hops?" I believe you are agreeing only 1 hour then? Personally my CFI spin training was a joke and if it was all the training I had I certainly wouldn't attempt to teach spins. Treat spin training like flying IFR, you certainly don't think 3 hours of instrument is enough to fly safely IMC, why would anyone think 3 hours or less spin training has you ready? What if your student recovers by throwing the nose forward too early and throws you inverted? Even worse what if he/she throws the stick forward hard while stomping hard opposite rudder and enters a secondary fully developed inverted spin? Would a CFI with 3 hours of spin training be able to safely recover and could the aircraft handle that load? There are too many dangers for little to no benefit for the primary student.

"Fully develop in the traffic pattern" First off as stated previously most trainers won't full develop and almost any aircraft when spun will loose nearly 1000 feet if perfectly recovered. So if your argueing that you can recover in a traffic pattern go speak with some aerobatic pilots and let them give you a little insight on how wrong this is.

Finally number 3 I agree completely but don't see the relevance to this topic.

The overall point is that spin training isn't important for a primary student because where they spin (in the pattern) is going to kill them if it happens. It is better to teach the primary student avoidance, not recovery. Where spin training pays off is for IFR as unusual attitudes from disorientation in a cloud can leave you exiting a cloud in a spin where proper training will save you from stupidly spinning in from 10,000 feet or whatever altitude you are cruising at.

Three hops of 45 minutes (flight time) each. And yes, it includes at least one inverted spin and recovery.
#3 because this needs to be part of the CFI training. As an example, while doing stalls in a Mooney I will use at least 3000' in case the stall turns into a spin. I do not cover the spin characteristics of all airplanes, but go over a few of them.
I do not think spins are like instrument flying. Using the PARE acronym most pilots I have trained are comfortable recovering from them after one hop. Hop two is for the pilot teach me how to recover from the spins, hop three more advanced spins such as inverted spins and demonstration of the effects of pro-spin inputs.
Will spin training save all pilots from spins? No, but it is another skill to put in your bag of tricks to pull from if needed.

 

[juskl]

Actually you are supposed to push the stick forward as you apply opposite rudder (as in at the same time). And before you go off too bad, I do teach aerobatics. The chances of going from an upright to an inverted spin is incredibly slim, as is a spin reversal. Can happen, but very rare (unless intending to do so, and even then it is tough to do). If you are inverted, just opposite rudder and release the foward stick (you will come out). Oh yeah, and unless you like the spin flat, power to idle.

You are correct that if you are close to the ground, you are dead (if a spin is entered). But the techniques used to get out of the spin is very practical. Usually with us it is about an hour of ground and two flights. About 45 minutes each. Sometimes longer, if the applicant gets queezy. We do about 10-12 spins. The applicant needs to demonstrate proficiency and teaching competency, for us to sign off the endorsement.

But no matter what, just getting the CFI (as you stated), does not mean the new CFI should be teaching spins. They should be trained to do so, and that takes a decent training program.

 

[nosehair]

But no matter what, just getting the CFI (as you stated), does not mean the new CFI should be teaching spins. They should be trained to do so, and that takes a decent training program.

Woah, here's the rub. "the new CFI shoudn't be teaching spins?".

Why do you think he is required to get trained to "instructional proficiency"?

This is the mindset that has gotten us to this level of controversy on this subject.

New instructors should be confident in spin maneuvers. That's why the regulation reads the way it does.

And "Confidence" is the real true goal of spin avoidance, entry, and recovery training.

All the arguments about spinning into the ground if you spin in the pattern anyway so why bother have no merit. The greater benifit is the overall confidence gained from mastery of the machine.

Total self confidence and cool mannered flying is what prevents stalls and spins.

 

[Blackhawk]

Woah, here's the rub. "the new CFI shoudn't be teaching spins?".

Why do you think he is required to get trained to "instructional proficiency"?

This is the mindset that has gotten us to this level of controversy on this subject.

New instructors should be confident in spin maneuvers. That's why the regulation reads the way it does.

And "Confidence" is the real true goal of spin avoidance, entry, and recovery training.

All the arguments about spinning into the ground if you spin in the pattern anyway so why bother have no merit. The greater benifit is the overall confidence gained from mastery of the machine.

Total self confidence and cool mannered flying is what prevents stalls and spins.

Unfortunately what should be taught and what is taught are two different things. The spin endorsement of almost every CFI I have encountered has been one flight in a 172 or other such airplane doing a few spins. Nothing more. Granted, I think it is a good idea to get some training in spins in the typical training airplane if it is certified to do so. But just doing a few spins does not make someone proficient enough to teach them. As a matter of fact some CFIs have accused me of "milking" students for requiring more than one hop for the CFI endorsment and some CFI applicants chose to go the cheap route of doing the endorsement in a 172 with their buddy instead of flying with me.
The CFI certificate permits you to teach just about anything. What is legal, however, is not necessarily safe. For example, I can go out and teach in a Beech 18 after only 5 hours in type. Not necessarily safe, especially if my 5 hours is spent in a trike version on a cross country, but I would be legal. I feel it is the same with the spin endorsement. I don't necessarily think all CFIs should be teaching it and I feel CFI applicants should seek out quality spin training in an aerobatic airplane.

 

[juskl]

I couldn't agree more.......

You are right, in that they should be able to. But as in doing anything, unless you do it for a living, you are going to be less then proficient. Let alone to teach it. Plus, most instructors that I have met want nothing to do with spins. Here is one for you, the Scottsdale FSDO won't allow their inspectors to do spins. If an applicant for a CFI fails a checkride on Spin/Stall awareness, they must farm out the checkride to a DPE whom feels comfortable doing the spins with the applicant......Tell me there is nothing wrong here......

Just because the endorsement is obtained, does not mean that someone is capable of teaching an inverted flat spin to proficiency. Of course you would have to be in an aerobatic rated aircraft to do this...... As blackhawk said in the Beech 18 scenario, you may be legal, but it aint smart.....

 

[shdw]

I don't necessarily think all CFIs should be teaching it and I feel CFI applicants should seek out quality spin training in an aerobatic airplane.

This was what my entire rant was about. Like it or not, most CFIs are not proficient to teach spins and many have less than 10 spins under their belt.

Can happen, but very rare

Yes it is very rare and I am not even sure if you can do it in a trainer aircraft, I have tried in a 172 w/rear seats removed and was unable to. Though my aerobatic training in a cap B we threw the nose forward right into an inverted spin just had to hold for 2 to 3 seconds opposite rudder and full forward on the stick. (EDIT for more detail: Once forward stick + opposite rudder were put in and heald the aircraft would stop spinning in about 1 to 2 seconds (half a turn) and then pause for a second and go into a vicious inverted spin to the opposite direction) The recovery fault I was referring to is if you perform both actions at the same time which a new student might do and an instructor with 10 spins in a 172 may have no idea of this danger.

All the arguments about spinning into the ground if you spin in the pattern anyway so why bother have no merit. The greater benefit is the overall confidence gained from mastery of the machine.

I bet if I fly with this same student that has "mastery of the machine" he/she won't even properly coordinate his/her turns. A spin masters absolutely nothing they are a basic and boring maneuver that in any trainer aircraft is nothing more than throwing full rudder full back pressure and when you want to get out of the maneuver you can release the controls and within a half a turn you are recovered. If you don't believe me grab your 172 or whatever you train in and give it a shot, they are too stable to even enter a developed spin and recover on their own.

If you want to gain mastery do a sort of chandelle where you go to 60 degrees of bank and at the finish of 180 degrees be at the stall buffet. That shows at least some form of mastery (coordination) because if you do it right to the aircrafts limits and aren't coordinated you stall.

When I start seeing accident reports where private pilots are spinning in from greater than 2000 feet (who didn't intentionally enter that spin) then I will be right there to teach every primary student spins. Until that day I will teach them coordination and spin avoidance especially as it relates to base to final with simple tricks like don't look at the runway because you will have a tendency to pull for it if you overshoot. Like it or not the statistics don't lie and the killer of private pilots has nothing to do with spins it has to do with them not using the controls the way they should be used for proper coordinated flight and that is why they spin and why they get killed not because they didn't know how to recover, the best aerobatic pilots in the world don't spin aircraft below 1000 feet for good reason you cannot recover.

 

[escapepilot]

I don't know how irresponsible this idea is so I figured I'd confer with the good ole CFI council.

How do you guys feel about doing spins with primary students as a way of getting them away from the fear that "they're going to immediately die" if they get into one? In the FARs it says that you're only allowed to do spin training if it's for the purpose of obtaining a rating. As far as I can tell, the CFI is the only FAA checkride that requires spin training--would that make spin training for a Private student illegal? As well, would this spin training be unethical?


Thanks for the help

IMO, teaching spins (or demonstrating) as a way to get a student over fear isn't usually going to work. More than likely, you're just going to increase the fear. When I have a student that is terribly afraid of stalls, I first go in depth into the aerodynamics of the stall, including AoA and Critical AoA. Then, during the flight, I'll demonstrate stalls and recovery using a low power setting. I'll initiate a slight nose high stall, recover by lowering the nose to the horizon, then stall again, then recover, and again. While I'm doing this, I'm saying "stalled", "not stalled". This re-enforces the AoA lesson and that exceeding the critical AoA is what causes a stall.

As for spins, I don't usually do spins; however, most students will at one time or another, let the aircraft get uncoordinated during the stall and in the Citabria, it will REALLY drop a wing. And as all CFIs should know, dropping that wing is the start of the incipient spin. So, in effect, I AM teaching spin recovery in the air w/o doing a full spin. I believe the biggest benefit from this is that a student will experience what it feels like. No amount of discussion on the ground can substitute for actually feeling it in the air.

Oh, and as for those students (or first time fliers) that feel "they're immediately going to die", I try to comfort them with "I like you, but I like me more and I'm not going to let anything happen to me."

 

[nosehair]

A spin masters absolutely nothing they are a basic and boring maneuver that in any trainer aircraft is nothing more than throwing full rudder full back pressure and when you want to get out of the maneuver you can release the controls and within a half a turn you are recovered.

You're right that a spin does nothing for teaching coordinated flight. That isn't the purpose.

Coordinated flight is a very basic skill that should be comfortably mastered before beginning spin training. The main purpose is to overcome the psychological fear of the airplane.

You can practice the rote maneuvers of Chandelles and Lazy 8's and get so good that the ball looks painted in there, and still lose it when a sudden upset throws you over 90 degrees and your heart stops and you ....

Overcoming the fear is the only good reason to teach spins to pilots. How much the fear/freeze factor contributes to accidents, we cannot measure.

That's why the influence of spin training cannot be measured.

The fact that all of our modern (post 1950) airplanes are pretty spin resistant is the reason it seems over the top to train spins, and the government has taken them out of required training,....and our government sure knows what it is doing, doesn't it? ..but stall/spins keep happening. Pilots freeze up when they encounter all these other factors that everyone talks about; weather, pax pressure, new machine/environment, etc. These are the things that can be seen and measured. The pilot's personal fear factor cannot.

I see spin training similar to actual IMC training....gets you over that initial fear factor.

On the subject of "legal ain't safe"... What has gone missing in our society and legality is the concept of morality in judgement. The current crop of "legal" financial moves done by Wall Street and Our Government
have caused a melt down of the system. Their cry is "We didn't do anything illegal." But they knew they were robbing us.

A professional includes morality in his or her judgement of "legal".

Even if you have 5 hours in the Beech 18 but don't feel safe in it, you are not legal. That's a professional opinion. I know that their are many people who consider themselves professional who will argue with that statement, and I would lose in our current court system where professional morality has already been lost...but there are some 'old school' judges who will still agree with me.

 

[escapepilot]

Overcoming the fear is the only good reason to teach spins to pilots. How much the fear/freeze factor contributes to accidents, we cannot measure.

That's why the influence of spin training cannot be measured.

Very good point. But you do have to be careful. I remember one of my first students. He had a terrible fear of stalls. We talked about it and I demo'd a spin....never saw him again. My fault for not realizing how strong his fear was.

 

[shdw]

Coordinated flight is a very basic skill that should be comfortably mastered before beginning spin training. The main purpose is to overcome the psychological fear of the airplane.

I've flown with pilots with 20,000 hours that still don't coordinate their turns properly and I haven't met a post private pre commercial student that does it right. Sure they do normally but here is what happens: they will use coordinated turn into when they are calm and collected but as soon as they have something else to do their feet go to sleep. So when they are on base to final on a windy day getting thrown around by turbulence that ball bounces all the way to one side then the other when, especially on gusty days, it should be fixed at max moving a half a ball width out.

Overcoming the fear is the only good reason to teach spins to pilots. How much the fear/freeze factor contributes to accidents, we cannot measure.

This is what spin training for a primary student does. http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20080625X00917&ntsbno=LAX08LA191&akey=1

If I have to I can go get you a multitude of accident reports that show pattern spins from uncoordinated flight. There are even reports I have read where the pilot has held back so hard on the stick in engine failures that they BEND the control steering arm. Sure spin training is great, sounds wonderful and gives you a bunch more to work with, but it doesn't address the problem. Plain and simple these people are dieing from pattern spins and no amount of spin training in the world is going to fix that. Even more common is spinning in after an engine failure because we don't spend enough time with students getting their instinct to pull up OUT of them.

Here is a little bit of final reading material from our friends at AOPA. http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/topics/stall_spin.pdf

It isn't the spin training that is going to save a person, it is a thorough understanding of how the aircraft works. Using practical and this must be repeated PRACTICAL terms, not advanced aerodynamic turns that will leave 90 percent of your students dumbfounded.

 

[MikeD]

This is what spin training for a primary student does. http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20080625X00917&ntsbno=LAX08LA191&akey=1

Wow.....pretty broad brush you're painting with there partner. I did spin training in primary, and I'm still alive 25 years later.

If I have to I can go get you a multitude of accident reports that show pattern spins from uncoordinated flight. There are even reports I have read where the pilot has held back so hard on the stick in engine failures that they BEND the control steering arm. Sure spin training is great, sounds wonderful and gives you a bunch more to work with, but it doesn't address the problem. Plain and simple these people are dieing from pattern spins and no amount of spin training in the world is going to fix that. Even more common is spinning in after an engine failure because we don't spend enough time with students getting their instinct to pull up OUT of them.


It isn't the spin training that is going to save a person, it is a thorough understanding of how the aircraft works. Using practical and this must be repeated PRACTICAL terms, not advanced aerodynamic turns that will leave 90 percent of your students dumbfounded.

Spin training is just another tool in the toolbox. It doesn't hurt, but's not completely required either. By your logic, teaching prevention for everything will insure that the event never happens; which is illogical. Not utilizing a tool that may help, just because you don't happen to like it, is also illogical.

Understanding how the aircraft works + spin training can help, not hurt....IF the IP knows how to teach it. If the IP/CFI is weak, then all bets are off.

 

[shdw]

Wow.....pretty broad brush you're painting with there partner. I did spin training in primary, and I'm still alive 25 years later.

I was referring to the pilots that will think their one or two spin training lessons will give them the proficiency they need to do it on their own and end up doing something stupid like in this accident. I was not saying that every student will go out and do this, however, pilots tend to still be the in the more risk taker category then the safety category and spins certainly are a nice way to impress your friends.

Spin training is just another tool in the toolbox.

I never disagreed with this, but I think your failing to see the point, did you read that AOPA article? The point is the typical spin encountered by a private pilot is <1000 feet which no spin training in the world will give a pilot the ability to recover from short of maybe a few of the top aerobatic pilots today. (Study of human factors shows between 2 to 4 seconds of freeze up time for pilots of any training level in emergency unusual attitude situations) You teaching spin training will help those 12-13 percent that occur at "altitude unknown."

Here is another little fun fact, "In reviewing 44 fatal stall/spin accidents from 1991 – 2000 classified as instructional, ASF found that a shocking 91%(40) of them occurred during dual instruction, with only 9% (4) during solo training flights." We all know CFIs get spin training so obviously we are still focusing to much on the recovery and not enough on the causes of the entry in the first place.

 

[ppragman]

Gooooooooood Gaaawwwwwd, is this thread still debating this ad nauseum, where's the dead horse emoticon?