Spins on primary training

c172captain

Well-Known Member
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
 
It's not illegal. It's good experience to get, though not required anymore at the Private level....(it was back when I went through in the mid 1980s)

BUT...

Do you have a spinnable aircraft?

How competent/comfortable are you at spins? At teaching them? At performing them?

Is it something the student would want to learn?

Not unethical, but you have to be able to answer some basic questions first before considering it.......primarily because it's now become the exception, rather than the norm, in PVT training.
 
Do you have a spinnable aircraft?

How competent/comfortable are you at spins? At teaching them? At performing them?

Is it something the student would want to learn?

-We would put the 172 in the Utility category

-I'm pretty comfortable at spins though I'm not very experienced at them (I've done about 8 spins and that was for the CFI requirement. They were in a 172 and I found them to be extremely docile and almost resistant to spins because of the automatic recovery). If I were to teach spins I'd do them on my own first with someone else who is more experienced until I got more spins and recoveries under my belt.

-My current student wants to break his fear of spins. Though every student is different and I'll approach the spin training differently with different students
 
-We would put the 172 in the Utility category

-I'm pretty comfortable at spins though I'm not very experienced at them (I've done about 8 spins and that was for the CFI requirement. They were in a 172 and I found them to be extremely docile and almost resistant to spins because of the automatic recovery). If I were to teach spins I'd do them on my own first with someone else who is more experienced until I got more spins and recoveries under my belt.

-My current student wants to break his fear of spins. Though every student is different and I'll approach the spin training differently with different students

Cool. There's nothing wrong with teaching it; it's good to know IMHO. I was brought up that way both civil in PVT, Comm, and CFI, as well as in the military. So I'm an advocate of it. As you long as you're comfortable, you have the right equipment, esp if the stud wants to learn it, and it's planned/briefed/flown/debriefed correctly; I see no problem with it.
 
Cool. There's nothing wrong with teaching it; it's good to know IMHO. I was brought up that way both civil in PVT, Comm, and CFI, as well as in the military. So I'm an advocate of it. As you long as you're comfortable, you have the right equipment, esp if the stud wants to learn it, and it's planned/briefed/flown/debriefed correctly; I see no problem with it.

Forgive me if I'm wrong but wouldn't I need a parachute since I'll be participating in aerobatic flight (exceend 30* of pitch and 60* of bank)? Or does the "except for the purposes" of training part make me not required to have that?
 
Forgive me if I'm wrong but wouldn't I need a parachute since I'll be participating in aerobatic flight (exceend 30* of pitch and 60* of bank)? Or does the "except for the purposes" of training part make me not required to have that?

Correct. Thats how I read 14 CFR 91.307(d)(2)(i). Now, some may interpret the portion of (2) that states "required by the regulations" to mean that since spins aren't required by the regulations for Private, then one is breaking the letter of the reg here; which I don't believe to be correct, nor does the one FSDO I queried. However, since we know that FSDOs aren't even standardized.....

....point is, if you do it safely, and as described further above; and there should be no problem.
 
I have spun everyone of my student pilots.


Edit: I think it is important for student pilots to see it.
 
Spins should be demonstrated to all Pvt. students. It is something that kills people every year and if you're teaching someone to fly this is one aspect that needs to be covered. Not doing so it gross negligence.
 
Spins should be demonstrated to all Pvt. students. It is something that kills people every year and if you're teaching someone to fly this is one aspect that needs to be covered. Not doing so it gross negligence.

Low level aerobatics should be demonstrated to all Pvt. students. It is something that kills people every year and if you're teaching someone to fly this is one aspect that needs to be covered. Not doing so it gross negligence.

Engine failures due to fuel exhaustion should be demonstrated to all Pvt. students. It is something that kills people every year and if you're teaching someone to fly this is one aspect that needs to be covered. Not doing so it gross negligence

Etc., etc.

:sarcasm:

For the record, I teach many student pilots spins and believe they are a beneficial part of training. However, I completely disagree with BajtheJino's "one size fits all" attitude as well as the logic of "if it kills people, it should be taught."

Spins are not appropriate for every student all the time and there are many safe pilots who have never seen a spin before.
 
Forgive me if I'm wrong but wouldn't I need a parachute since I'll be participating in aerobatic flight (exceend 30* of pitch and 60* of bank)? Or does the "except for the purposes" of training part make me not required to have that?
I'll disagree with MikeD on this. The "Spins and other flight maneuvers required by the regulations for any certificate or rating" part takes you out of the parachute requirement.

There used to be a lot of argument about it, but most FSDOs got into line with the uniform interpretation about 10 or so years ago. There might be the odd holdover, though - there are always inspectors out there who prefer their own rules to the FAA's.
 
Who said spins ae not a requirement for PVT???


Okay, I know demonstration of spins is not required but knowledge of spin recovery IS a requirement. Is there not a better way to gain the knowledge of spin recovery than actually recovering one?
 
Who said spins ae not a requirement for PVT???


Okay, I know demonstration of spins is not required but knowledge of spin recovery IS a requirement. Is there not a better way to gain the knowledge of spin recovery than actually recovering one?

Unassisted spin recovery demo was a presolo requirement (CFI induced) for me in 1994, but there was no PTS standards other than: "during the checkride the Inspector (no DPE's) could ask for anything that would not put the aircraft beyond limitations (well they could ask for it, and if you attempted to comply you had failed) but every question and demo was fair game.

I'm not a CFI yet, but I would feel uncomfortable letting a student loose before having covered some of the major killers, which seems to be upset recovery and spin recovery proficiency. If my school had no spinnable plane I would go out of my way to find the student someone with the right plane to get him/ her exposed.
 
I haven't done spins with any of my primary students, although I have had them all recover from several properly entered cross-controlled stalls. Doing that allows them to see the same "Oh, there's the ground!" as a spin does, without encroaching on the gray area of the regulation for using parachutes. Also, those don't happen until the students "enjoy" stalls, so it doesn't negatively get them scared to do the slow flight/stall series.


I agree that spins should be required for every primary training. But, the Parachute regulation makes me just a tad uncomfortable. Does anyone recall if the old FAR FAQs mentioned recourse for that?
 
I haven't done spins with any of my primary students, although I have had them all recover from several properly entered cross-controlled stalls. Doing that allows them to see the same "Oh, there's the ground!" as a spin does, without encroaching on the gray area of the regulation for using parachutes. Also, those don't happen until the students "enjoy" stalls, so it doesn't negatively get them scared to do the slow flight/stall series.


I agree that spins should be required for every primary training. But, the Parachute regulation makes me just a tad uncomfortable. Does anyone recall if the old FAR FAQs mentioned recourse for that?

The parachute rule is crystal clear in 14CFR 91.307 (D)

You do not need a parachute as per that. I don't see a gray area.
I believe this stems largely from the packing and inspection requirements associated with any parachute and the associated costs. However, people focussing on this type of training (like Chandler, Airbum and others) will probably be rather anal about having and maintaining their equipment in top shape and providing the parachutes to students and cfi's.
 
I'll disagree with MikeD on this. The "Spins and other flight maneuvers required by the regulations for any certificate or rating" part takes you out of the parachute requirement.

There used to be a lot of argument about it, but most FSDOs got into line with the uniform interpretation about 10 or so years ago. There might be the odd holdover, though - there are always inspectors out there who prefer their own rules to the FAA's.

I believe we do agree Mark, that parachutes aren't required for spins. What I was saying (or trying to say) is that I've run into the odd person here and there that have interperted the "required by regulations" to mean that since it's not required for a PVT certificate, then you do need a chute; which is an interpertation I disagree with, as does the FSDO I've checked with. Hence why I told the OP to press-on with the training, pending he plans and executes as per above.
 
I show primary students a cross-control stall/spin entry in the 172 (only when loaded in the utility category, of course).
 
I believe we do agree Mark, that parachutes aren't required for spins. What I was saying (or trying to say) is that I've run into the odd person here and there that have interperted the "required by regulations" to mean that since it's not required for a PVT certificate, then you do need a chute; which is an interpertation I disagree with, as does the FSDO I've checked with. Hence why I told the OP to press-on with the training, pending he plans and executes as per above.

There is FAA chief consul opinion that states if a manuver required for ANY certificate or rating, then a parachute is not required. Since spins are required for the CFI, then the parachute is not required for normal spins.
 
Back
Top