Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Spins

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

wild.blue(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:33 am Post subject: Spins

Gents--



Not to beat the dog, but it may be wise to remember that spinning any

airplane involves some risk, even your favorite fully tested and thoroughly

flogged certified aerobatic airplane.  Correct me here, but I'm unaware of

any documented flight test data for Yak-50's, -52's or Nanchangs regarding

fully developed and flat spins.  I hope they were required to demonstrate

some sort of spin recovery capability and documented demonstrated recovery

techniques, something at least equivalent to what FAA requires for aerobatic

airplane certification (which ain't much), but I've never seen any evidence.

 Anecdotes ain't documentation.



Just because you did a couple of one or even two or three-rotation spins in

a 150 or 172 during CFI training or you read all about spins in Gene Beggs'

or Rich Stowell's books doesn't mean you know anything about spinning Yaks

or Nanchangs.  Yes, Craig, Nanchangs (forward CG) are hard to hold in a spin

 but put a little weight in the tail and its a different matter.  We all

know too many folks have been killed in -52 spin accidents.  Too many highly

skilled, highly experienced pilots have been killed in lots of different

airplanes that were supposed to be safe to spin.  Art Scholl--who was famous

for his airshow 27-turn inverted flat spins--comes to mind (Pitts S-2A).



If you've ever seen any of the film of NASA spin testing Grumman Yankees you

have to wonder what ever made anyone involved in the project think the

airplane had potential for aerobatic certification (which they had intended)

  Engineers get it wrong, too.



The classic wings level, gradual speed reduction, stick all the way back,

stand on the rudder spin entry and the equally classic crossed controls base

to final skid entry are not what kill folks.  It's not stalling at low

altitude, either.  It's distraction, surprise and especially--though I hate

to say it--piss poor piloting technique.  It's not the entry, it's not the

recovery, its awareness and avoidance that must be learned and exercised. 

That means keeping the nose down, the speed up, the ball in the cage, the

bank shallow and your head on tight at low speed and low altitude.



Spin training, yes--very carefully, in the right airplane with a truly

qualified instructor.  Test piloting--are you really sure you want to do

that?



Let's be careful out there.  Good piloting skills require proper instruction

and lots of practice.  To paraphrase Alexander the Great:  De Le vigilance,

encore de Le vigilance, toujour de Le vigilance!



Jerry Painter

Wild Blue Aviation

425-876-0865

www.FlyWBA.com

JP(at)FlyWBA.com

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 2:42 pm Post subject: Spins

So basically what you are saying here Jerry is that you do not advise

getting spin training in the type of aircraft that you own, be it a

YAK-52, YAK-50 or CJ?  And that instead of spin training, you recommend

spin avoidance instead.  Again, if I am getting the wrong meaning out of

what you have written, please correct me. 



If I have indeed interpreted you correctly, I just want to say that I

completely disagree with you.  I have received spin training in a number

of different aircraft.  Each one has it's own little way of doing

things, and personally I do not think anyone should even begin to think

about doing aerobatics in a YAK-50 or 52 or CJ until they have received

spin training in the make and model of aircraft that they plan on doing

said aerobatics in.  



I do agree totally that there is always some risk involved.... That risk

starts as soon as you put the key into the ignition of a car, turn on

the mags of an airplane, you name it.  The risk factor increases doing

spins, landing at night at a short field you have never landed at

before, etc., etc.  Life's a risk for heavens sake.  



FYI, both the 50 and 52 have a Flight Manual that has been translated

from the original Russian.  In that Flight Manual, it describes the

procedures for certain aerobatic maneuvers including spins.  



When I learned to fly, some of the Instructors had never been in a spin

in their entire life.  We were taught to avoid them at all costs, and to

be ... Pretty much... Scared to death of the darn things.  I flew for

YEARS with that stigma.  I now fervently believe that it is the wrong

way to go when it comes to flying airplanes.  



Let me repeat... I am not saying you are wrong.  I am saying I do not

agree with you... Each of us has the right to not agree... So no mud

slinging intended. 



Mark Bitterlich

 



--

drc(at)wscare.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 3:21 pm Post subject: Spins

I agree with Mark.



I know what Jerry's point is - and I would not jump on him though.

I think he is correct that a guy who does not have adequate training,  

reliable data from the manufacture, or a modified plane is becoming a  

test pilot.



I do not have good data and info on the Yak 52TW.  I have talked to  

the Romanians at OSH and they cannot supply flight testing info that  

would be of any use.  Also when we moved the oil cooler and modified  

the leading edge of the airplane, I went up high and became a test  

pilot.  We had 3 different openings and a variety of fences for the  

opening to the oil cooler and I went out and stalled/spun the plane  

from numerous attitudes and configurations to collect the info for the  

mod.  We tufted the right wing to look at airflow around the opening.   

So yes my experience with a newly manufactured and modified plane  

confirms Jerry's conclusion that we become test pilots.



On the other hand the Yak 55 -

Good information from Russia, translated into English.  An airframe  

designed to compete in aerobatics with stall spin a required figure  

(not to be avoided). I would say that is more what Mark is  

describing.  Yet it is a single place - you can talk about stall spin  

on the ground all you want and read about it in the manual, but at  

some point you just have to go do it.  You have to take flying  

experience from other planes, and people's advice and go out by  

yourself and learn what the plane does.  But with good information.



Herb

On Jan 7, 2009, at 4:40 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,  

MALS-14 64E wrote:



[quote] 

 Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil>



 So basically what you are saying here Jerry is that you do not advise

 getting spin training in the type of aircraft that you own, be it a

 YAK-52, YAK-50 or CJ?  And that instead of spin training, you  

 recommend

 spin avoidance instead.  Again, if I am getting the wrong meaning  

 out of

 what you have written, please correct me.



 If I have indeed interpreted you correctly, I just want to say that I

 completely disagree with you.  I have received spin training in a  

 number

 of different aircraft.  Each one has it's own little way of doing

 things, and personally I do not think anyone should even begin to  

 think

 about doing aerobatics in a YAK-50 or 52 or CJ until they have  

 received

 spin training in the make and model of aircraft that they plan on  

 doing

 said aerobatics in.



 I do agree totally that there is always some risk involved.... That  

 risk

 starts as soon as you put the key into the ignition of a car, turn on

 the mags of an airplane, you name it.  The risk factor increases doing

 spins, landing at night at a short field you have never landed at

 before, etc., etc.  Life's a risk for heavens sake.



 FYI, both the 50 and 52 have a Flight Manual that has been translated

 from the original Russian.  In that Flight Manual, it describes the

 procedures for certain aerobatic maneuvers including spins.



 When I learned to fly, some of the Instructors had never been in a  

 spin

 in their entire life.  We were taught to avoid them at all costs,  

 and to

 be ... Pretty much... Scared to death of the darn things.  I flew for

 YEARS with that stigma.  I now fervently believe that it is the wrong

 way to go when it comes to flying airplanes.



 Let me repeat... I am not saying you are wrong.  I am saying I do not

 agree with you... Each of us has the right to not agree... So no mud

 slinging intended.



 Mark Bitterlich

 --

bu131(at)swbell.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:47 pm Post subject: Spins

we can beat this subject to death 

 but a few words to the wise

 I lost a few friends in the T-6 world  with similar situations

 after 25 years and many scars in my back I developed a few safe rules

 I happen to be  number 2 behind  a good friend of mine whom I had to extract from the ground and hate to see this recurring.

  

 overhead approaches 

 at 90 degrees of bank if you load the stick (because you are pushed away due to quarterly winds) or mismanaged the turn (turning too late)

 in a T-6 there is not enough power to recover similar in a yak and other airplanes you need 300 + miles/hr to stay flying

 therefore break always high over the field, do not extend the turn, always keep the ball in the center, its a COORDINATED TURN

 cross control will kill you. 

 You can have 1000 hrs of spin training and there is not a soul in the world that will save you from braking  your neck. You have to AVOID entering a 

 landing stall, not enough room to recover. 

  

 If you dont believe it, get an instructor, go to 10,000 feet, drop gear and flaps, slow it to 90 kts (landing configuration) do an overhead approach 

 not losing more than 400 feet in the turn and then just load the stick (you will not believe how fast you will get in a full established spin)...

  

 spin recovery (thanks to Nikolai for the instruction) is absolutely needed. Any hammerhead maneuver at the top with cross control not only will get you

 into a spin but possible into an inverted spin which in the yaks and sukhois with their gyroscopic effects are not natural to recover. There is the jesus 

 maneuver to learn etc to be able to manage such attitudes. But unless you do aerobatic and simple formation flight please be original and try a different

 way to go. 

  

 fly safe

 my thoughts to the flush and GIB family

  

 ak



 [quote][b]

yakplt(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:57 pm Post subject: Spins

My 2 cents yet again.  

  

 In order to fully recognize when a spin is getting ready to happen... you have to be in the airplane a few times when it actually does happen.   Period.  Of course you want to avoid a spin in the pattern, but to avoid crossed controls and to "always keep the ball in the middle?"  What happened to the "slip to landing" practice we all had as private pilots?  

  

 While doing  Hammerheads it is quite common to use crossed controls.  For example, .. full right rudder with just a tad of left aileron ... because the left wing is swinging faster with a hammer to the right,   it develops a tad more lift, thus a little left aileron is required to keep the maneuver clean without rotation of the fuselage.  The trick is to keep it on the exact vertical line while doing this.  When your vertical line is off, and you end up say... pushing forward on the stick, with outboard aileron and full right rudder... you can go right into an inverted spin.  The answer is not to avoid cross controls but to develop a good vertical line.  

  

 The bottom line is that there are many MANY ways to fly an airplane without crashing the darn thing.  More important than anything else is attitude.  Anyone that gets at least somewhat serious about aerobatics knows that the first thing to achieve is not to be afraid of the airplane.  In order to accomplish this one needs to be convinced that he or she can recover from anything unexpected.  This takes training and practice and not avoidance.  

  

 The question is should anyone be doing 90 degree high G Sectional breaks into the pattern multi-ship with none of the above teaching or practice at all?  Others may disagree.. but I say "no".  Of course I could be wrong.  

  

 Mark Bitterlich

 N50YK

 

 

 

   From: Dr Andre Katz <bu131(at)swbell.net>

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2009 7:46:41 PM

Subject: Re: Spins



  we can beat this subject to death 

 but a few words to the wise

 I lost a few friends in the T-6 world  with similar situations

 after 25 years and many scars in my back I developed a few safe rules

 I happen to be  number 2 behind  a good friend of mine whom I had to extract from the ground and hate to see this recurring.

  

 overhead approaches 

 at 90 degrees of bank if you load the stick (because you are pushed away due to quarterly winds) or mismanaged the turn (turning too late)

 in a T-6 there is not enough power to recover similar in a yak and other airplanes you need 300 + miles/hr to stay flying

 therefore break always high over the field, do not extend the turn, always keep the ball in the center, its a COORDINATED TURN

 cross control will kill you. 

 You can have 1000 hrs of spin training and there is not a soul in the world that will save you from braking  your neck. You have to AVOID entering a 

 landing stall, not enough room to recover. 

  

 If you dont believe it, get an instructor, go to 10,000 feet, drop gear and flaps, slow it to 90 kts (landing configuration) do an overhead approach 

 not losing more than 400 feet in the turn and then just load the stick (you will not believe how fast you will get in a full established spin)...

  

 spin recovery (thanks to Nikolai for the instruction) is absolutely needed. Any hammerhead maneuver at the top with cross control not only will get you

 into a spin but possible into an inverted spin which in the yaks and sukhois with their gyroscopic effects are not natural to recover. There is the jesus 

 maneuver to learn etc to be able to manage such attitudes. But unless you do aerobatic and simple formation flight please be original and try a different

 way to go. 

  

 fly safe

 my thoughts to the flush and GIB family

  

 [quote][b]

richard.goode(at)russiana
Guest

Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 7:54 pm Post subject: Spins

Following a fatal spinning accident in a 52-flown by a highly experienced 

pilot [one of the top handful of aerobatic pilots at a World Championship 

level]BUT NO EXPERIENCE in the 52,I did a lot of research into this issue.

I found SEVEN different flight manuals for the 52 and ONLY ONE went into any 

detail of the potential problems of recovery from developed spins!

This is because the Russians and others were being taught in a military 

system where spin training was done in the aircraft with a really competent 

pilot.[Also,in passing,where no pilot was allowed to fly aerobatics weighing 

more than 100 kgs-220 lbs,total with clothes,parachute etc.!!]

Richard G.

Richard Goode Aerobatics

Rhodds Farm

Lyonshall

Hereford

HR5 3LW

United Kingdom



Tel:   +44 (0) 1544 340120

Fax:  +44 (0) 1544 340129

www.russianaeros.com

I'm currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is 

+94 779 132 160.



---

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:44 pm Post subject: Spins

Do you spin the 52 Richard? 



Mark Bitterlich

 



--

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:44 pm Post subject: Spins

I concur with everything Herb has said here, and Jerry as well

(regarding "becoming a test pilot" in certain circumstances).  What Herb

said about the 55 applies just as well to the 50.  The 50 was designed

to be an aerobatic competitor from day one.  Regarding the 52, I'll let

owners of the aircraft thrash that question around.  I do not own one,

nor have I flown one, but I have watched Sergei Boriak teach guys here

in New Bern to TUMBLE that aircraft time after time, and I kind of think

that if the aircraft can tumble, that it is probably safe for spins

given the correct instruction and the proper precautions, (as mentioned

by Richard Goode more than once).  



One addition:  When I first spun my 50... I did it by myself, starting

way way up high.  The thing acted a little strange. The details of which

are not worth mentioning... .but it was kind of like the airplane was

talking to me and saying: "Something here is just not quite right".  A

feeling more than a known issue... The plane just departed much faster

and with a suddenness that I had never felt before in another airplane.

Later I spun it under the supervision of Sergei Boriak watching from the

ground.  That guy is so good it is like having him in the backseat of an

airplane that only has one seat.  He could see every little nuance of

what was going on and was coaching me with stick inputs going in and

coming out of the spin.  Just an amazing guy.  



ANYWAY....  



Here is the primary reason I am writing this posting.  I never did a

weight and balance on my aircraft myself.  I used the previous data from

the previous owner.  I guess I would have to admit that this was a

mistake... A bad one.  During my second or third year of ownership on my

50, I modified the tailwheel locking adjustments so that you had to push

the stick ALL THE WAY FORWARD to unlock the tailwheel.  This keeps the

tailwheel from unlocking during normal flight and then going into a bad

shimmy when landing.  If your 50 does this, send me a private email.

ANYWAY... When I took everything apart in the tail, I found a 20 pound

lead weight neatly installed back there.  WTFO !!!!  No wonder my 50

would do a snap roll so much better than any other 50 I had ever flown.

It also explained the weird spin feelings I had with this aircraft.  The

logs did not show any such modification.  I have no idea who put it in.

Obviously it is gone now. 



Mark Bitterlich

N50YK

 



--

cjpilot710(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:23 pm Post subject: Spins

I don't think there is a question here whether or not spin training is  the good safety insurance or not.  I believe that along with "normal  spin" training some or more time should be spent on the unusual attitudes from  whence spins can occur.  Not just from just poorly started loops,  rolls, or hammerheads, (more a issue in Yaks) but in the mundane turns.   

  

 Year ago when I was teaching in Cubs and Champs, spins were required on our  school flight curriculum.  In particularly what we called "over the top"  and "out of the bottom" spin entries.   Crossed control spin entries.  

  

 The "over the top" spin was done from a climbing turn.  After  established, a slip was induced by rudder, either by reducing required  rudder or adding top rudder, and the bank angle held with the ailerons.  At  stall, the airplane would usually brake toward the high wing.  If controls  were held, she would virtually, snap away from the turn and start to enter a  spin opposite the original turn.  The same again was performed but this  time by inducing a skid.  This time of course the airplane would brake into  the turn.

  

 The "out of the bottom" spins were done the same way except from a  glide.  Of course this was to imply and simulate what could happen in the  traffic pattern.  Of course the WW2 PT-22 had the worst reputation for  stall/spin.  I am willing to bet where most of the accidents  happened?

 If I remember correctly we spent more time on these stalls and spin entries  than we did on anything straight ahead.

  

 Like a number have already remarked on this list, I believe one should be  very aware and training should cover ALL those realms of flight where  stall/spins can occur.  In particularly in those that could happen at  altitudes and speeds that one would encounter down wind to base, to final  part of the pattern.  While I do not want to minimum-ize the need for  training of spins at altitude, pre-stall and eminent spin recognition is what  may save more guys, simply  because they will fly though that area on every  flight.

  

 One other point.  A lot of forced landings are blotched and turned  deadly because of the same problem.  "Trying to hard - with nothing  left".  Trying to turn back to the runway, after a takeoff engine  failure?  Once again - stall with incipient spin will do them in.

  

 The CJ does not want to spin BUT she will brake to a very nose down  attitude with wing snap, with any cross controls.  If this happen  below pattern altitude, you may position the controls to recover from the stall  and even stop the spin, BUT there is no altitude left.  From a 8 hundred  feet, traffic pattern there just not enough room for a recovery.  She is  just a very pretty green anvil.  

  

 Today I took my CJ-6 up to 4,000' and practiced a total stall series.   At one point I tried to simulate what might have happen.  I hate to  admit it but the point here is in 1,500 hours of CJ-6 time, I've never done  cross control stalls with the gear and flaps down before in the CJ-6.  So I  was really interested in what might happen.  The airplane behaved as you  would expect, perhaps with slightly faster rolls rates than with gear and flaps  up.  (I would have thought because of gear and flaps being down, they would  dampen roll and pitch rates).  It seem to me it took considerably more  control deflection to produce the brake but the brake was sharper and roll  rate higher.  IAS at the stall was about 75Kts and bank angle was around  >45'.  When the elevator was held back, there was a very short stall  burble which ended at the brake.  The nose pitched from about 10 deg nose  down to about 85 deg nose down within 2 second and rolled about 90 deg at the  same time.  At that point I initiated recovery.  I found that the  airplane had lost between 300 & 400 feet from the brake  altitude and required another 200' to 300' to recover to straight and  level flight.  A average total of 600' from the brake  altitude.

  

 This was not an unusual "hairy" maneuver at 4,000' but down below pattern  altitude, I am sure it would instill panic, where someone might lock back  on the stick.

  

 Not everyone in the aviation community has had the advantage of  "government" schools nor professional aviation back grounds.  Compared to  the 3K of F-whatever time or 24,000 hr of heavy time, many of our members are  low timers.  Many of our members start out at our local FBO and pay their  way though the tickets. There some schools out there better than others.   And I personally think that more training should be spend on basic stick and  rudder.  But in this day of GPS, TSA, ADIZ, Class B,C,D, etc. the  average private pilot has more stuff to worry about and required to learn, than  we did over 50 years ago.  Most likely most of our guys have gotten just  the minima spin training during their 10 hours insurance check outs.  That  is if their instructor isn't afraid of CJ or Yak spins. 

  

 Passing the "word" at RPA clinics, airport coffee shop, coke machine by the  hangar, bar, or over this list, helps.  Good training, - hopefully, will  keep the body count down.

  

 Jim "Pappy" Goolsby

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  



A Good Cr75x1215047751x1200957972/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=DecemailfooterNO62"> See yours in just 2 easy steps!

  [quote][b]

nigel(at)yakdisplay.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:51 pm Post subject: Spins

I do....



Nigel

http://yakdisplay.com

--

wild.blue(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:36 pm Post subject: Spins

Years ago I taught college AF, Navy and Marine ROTC cadets how to fly. One

guy in particular was pretty sharp and wound up instructing on T-38's. He

was killed in short order by a student who stalled and snapped the aircraft

in the pattern. I gave another guy a BFR about a year ago who had also

instructed on T-38's. Had some pretty good stories. 

 

I'm thoroughly convinced that lots of practice flying slow in different

configurations/attitudes is the best way to learn how an airplane will

behave in those situations you'd rather avoid. Sensitizes the hind quarters

and earballs, encourages proper movement of hands and feet.  It won't

prevent the diversion induced unexpected tho it makes folks more aware of

the possibilities and consequences so more likely to practice avoidance.

Doing spins is fun and instructive, too, in the right airplane, but in and

of themselves don't really expose folks (usually) to the kinds of situations

that lead to the unexpected. -52's are very docile aircraft, usually, but I

m not going to spin one. I'll take the word of folks like Richard Goode and

the unfortunate experiences of those who've been killed in them (including a

friend of mine) to heart. Learning at least basic aerobatics is good, too.

Opens the envelope. We are so fortunate that these airplanes became

available when they did and at reasonable prices so standard issue

folks/aging boomers could join up to do the kind of flying the airplanes

were built to do. Not readily available elsewhere on the civilian market.

T-34's, T-6's, T-28's etc are a bit pricey for most of us. Glad to see that

others, RV's etc have joined in the fun. 

 

BTW, there is a video on U-Tube of a de Havilland Mosquito doing a fly by

that winds up in a half-assed pitch up to a half roll, inverted stall/spin,

flat spin, spin reversal and crash.  No apparent power reduction.  Almost

looks intentional and almost recovered.  Not pretty.  I presume the pilot

was an otherwise experienced and sharp sort.

 

The -52 spin article is worth making more widely available--why don't you to

post to the list? In fact I think I'll post this whole discussion. 

 

JP 

 

----

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:56 pm Post subject: Spins

Sorry, the more you emphasize how you feel about it Jerry, the more I am

going to reply and keep saying that I disagree and honestly think my

point of view is just as meaningful and valid as yours is.  I have no

question in my mind that anyone who reads what we both have written is

aware of the two widely divergent points of view.  So what do we have to

gain by continuing to write about it?  I have no problem with spin

avoidance training.  You seem to be bound and determined to influence as

many people as you can from getting spin training.  I just don't get it.

While you say that spin and aerobatic training "opens the envelope",

everywhere else in your posting you advocate against it, at least IMHO.

Anyone that has been exposed to flying long enough accumulates stories.

Telling them over a cold beer is a very important and fun part of what

flying is all about.  I am not going to debate specifics concerning

every accident story on the planet, so I will not address the ones you

mention.  



So... You say:  "I'm thoroughly convinced that lots of practice flying

slow in different configurations/attitudes is the best way to learn how

an airplane will behave in those situations you'd rather avoid."  



How in the world are you going to learn how an aircraft will behave in a

situation you would rather avoid, by never experiencing what it is you

trying to avoid?  To me, that is like saying:  In order to avoid

skidding around in circles driving in your car when it snows, simply

either don't drive in the snow, or if you do, drive slow enough so that

you will never skid.  When I was a kid, my Dad took me to a BIG parking

lot after a good snow.  We went skidding and sliding all over the place.

Had a ball doing it too.  In the end I learned how to steer into a skid,

learned how to not just JAM ON THE BRAKES AND HOLD THEM to avoid sliding

into another car, etc., etc.  This skill set saved my butt many times

when driving in the snow.  This is an EXACT analogy to the present

topic.  A person can either learn to drive a car right up to the point

where a skid is probably going to occur, and stop right there and hope

it never goes beyond that point... Or he or she can learn by doing.  



That said, you can learn how to fly an airplane the way you say, and

hope to JESUS that nothing ever comes up that distracts you, or the

airplane is rigged wrong, or you accidentally get into wake turbulence,

WHATEVER... Point being, you never EVER get into a situation where the

airplane is in a position and/or situation that you never have been in

before and have no freaking idea how to get out of, ..... Or, you can

realize that an airplane has the capability to do a whole lot more than

what you learned as a private pilot, and it might be a good idea to

prepare yourself for that kind of situation should it ever occur.  The

first method builds a fear of the unknown, that is simple human nature.

The second method builds confidence in ones self and in the airplane.  



You said: " Doing spins is fun and instructive, too, in the right

airplane " 



The list of aircraft that are approved for spins is much higher than the

number that are not.  A Cessna 172 is approved for spins.  If the

airplane that you fly is approved for spins, you should be taught spins

in that aircraft.  Later on you can branch out and spin something like a

PITTS and do the whole spin regimen. I.E. Upright, inverted, flat, etc. 



You said:  " Doing spins is fun and instructive, too, in the right

airplane, but in and of themselves don't really expose folks (usually)

to the kinds of situations that lead to the unexpected. "



I have no problem with that statement.  This is not an EITHER // OR

situation.  Of course I advocate spin avoidance!  Who would not,

especially in the pattern!  However.... While doing spin training does

not expose a pilot to the kinds of situations that lead to the

unexpected (as you say), not doing spin training leaves a pilot totally

unprepared for what happens AFTER the unexpected manages to somehow

happen. Why do you think CFI's have to be taught spins as a matter of

FAA requirements?   



You said: "  -52's are very docile aircraft, usually, but I m not going

to spin one " 



Then I would strongly advise that when you do fly a 52, that you keep it

perfectly within the confines of what is defined as "non-aerobatic

flight".  No bank angles beyond 60 degrees for example.  No rolls, no

loops. Etc., etc.  However, the YAK-52 was built as an aerobatic

trainer.  Most owners of them are going to want to do something other

than fly straight and level.  When someone of your skill and experience

says:  "I am not going to spin a YAK-52" that kind of gives the

lay-person the sense that there must be something inherently dangerous

about doing a spin in a YAK-52, and as such ... They should be avoided

at all costs.  This is simply not the case. 



You then go further by saying:  " I'll take the word of folks like

Richard Goode and the unfortunate experiences of those who've been

killed in them (including a friend of mine) to heart." 



You are quoting Richard Goode TOTALLY OUT OF CONTEXT and that is wrong.

Richard Goode never once said not to spin a YAK-52.  What he DID say is

that if you do spin one, you should be well aware of some of the special

characteristics of this airplane, and you should get that spin training

with a totally qualified instructor in this particular make and model.

This is good advice for ANY kind of training in ANY kind of aircraft!

Lastly, as you and anyone else with any real history in aviation knows,

people have been killed in just about every make and model of aircraft

made.  Some die in spins because they are improperly trained, or are

with poor instructors, and some fly a perfectly good airplane right into

a mountain, or run them out of gas, etc. etc.  The list is endless.  Do

not try to imply some kind of inherent additional danger regarding spins

as compared to any other aspect of flying that is not done correctly.

We all know that a careless and/or reckless approach to flying is

inherently dangerous whether it be spins, or simply taxing across the

flight line.  



Quote: " Learning at least basic aerobatics is good, too.  Opens the

envelope."  



Completely agree.  



Quote: " Glad to see that others, RV's etc have joined in the fun "



The IAC is even thinking about including them in a special aerobatic

category for the same exact reason. Of course, that means you have to

learn how to spin one.  



You comment: "BTW, there is a video on U-Tube of a de Havilland Mosquito

doing a fly by that winds up in a half-assed pitch up to a half roll,

inverted stall/spin, flat spin, spin reversal and crash.  No apparent

power reduction.  Almost looks intentional and almost recovered.  Not

pretty.  I presume the pilot was an otherwise experienced and sharp

sort."



And your point is?  Scott Crossfield flew right into a thunderstorm and

died.  Bob Hoover crashed after some idiot filled his airplane with

JET-A after an airshow.  The lead pilot of the Thunderbirds flew his

whole team into the deck and killed every one of them during practice

some years ago.  Recently during a section flight in this area, lead got

too slow during a formation approach and a young low time pilot stalled

and spun in while flying on his wing.  Some of the very best pilots on

this planet have crashed and/or died from a momentary lapse of judgment.

What exact point is made by that?  Flying can be dangerous?  



Lastly you said: " The -52 spin article is worth making more widely

available--why don't you to post to the list? In fact I think I'll post

this whole discussion. " 



First,..... part of that discussion you decided to make public

specifically mentioned the recent crash in Texas, and we have been asked

not to discuss that in public, so I am removing that from my message

string here.  Second, .....in most circles it is considered to be not in

the best of taste to participate in a private email discussion (where

the rules about what we should or should not discuss in public do not

apply) and then take that conversation and post it for the whole world

to see.  Especially without asking all the other participants first.

Sorry if that sounds like a lecture, but I know that when someone does

that to me, it really makes me angry.  Others don't care at all.... But

I believe it is better to be safe than sorry when taking a private

conversation public.   



Back to the main topic.  I think we might BOTH agree that spin

prevention is a good idea.  Can we not also agree that Spin Training is

equally as important to create the best blend in total pilot training?  



Mark Bitterlich

 



--

wise(at)txc.net.au
Guest

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:12 pm Post subject: Spins

Beautifully said

---

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum