Spins Video question ?

[love2fly14]

This video is old and I'm the the process of learning spins.......
I have a few questions...

First, I don't think it is 7 spins ? and second is it possible that the opposite rudder can't stop the rotation???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2rm7n9Vz3c

[PilotDAR]

For certified single engine airplanes, the design requirement (FAR 23.221) states:

"....(iii) It must be impossible to obtain unrecoverable spins with any use of the flight or engine power controls either at the entry into or during the spin;"

But, once you're past a turn or two in a utility category aircraft, recovery can take a little longer.

I have spin tested some normal category aircraft which demanded a skillful recovery at extreme C of G positions. Full control applied and held, at times....

[rxl]

Opposite rudder alone won't do it. You have to release back pressure on the control column or stick to get both wings flying again. Opposite rudder alone may stop the auto-rotation, but the wing will remain stalled if you do not release back pressure.

[Big Pistons Forever]

For an aircraft that is certified for spins the testing only extends to 6 turns. Exceeding 6 turns means you are now a test pilot. I think this guy was dumb.

Personally I think if you are not an aerobatic instructor flying an acrobatically certified aircraft you are not qualified to demonstrate spinning past 2 turns.

If you are teaching for the PPL or CPL you should be teaching how to recover from spins. Keeping the aircraft in a fully developed spin has no training value IMO.

[AuxBatOn]

For an aircraft that is certified for spins the testing only extends to 6 turns. Exceeding 6 turns means you are now a test pilot.

To be fair, he certainly isn't the first person to do this... And it is certified for 6 but it doesn't mean it hasn't been tested for more.

[cgzro]

.If you are teaching for the PPL or CPL you should be teaching how to recover from spins. Keeping the aircraft in a fully developed spin has no training value IMO.

i suppose fully devoloped spins are similar to a power on entry into a spin and or aft cg, ie fast , tight, nose rises , more monentum so longer to recover... so there is some value but I personally think the best bang for the buck is the power on climbing turning incipient with aft cg..

Concerning the "will it always recover question", yes IF you have the aircraft within weight and balance limits AND you properly neutralize the ailerons AND close the throttle AND use rudder and elevator as described in the POH. If you dont close the throttle or misuse the ailerons or elevator it can delay or prevent recovery, infact in some aircraft elevator misuse can turn the spin from upright to inverted which is quite the experience!

[PilotDAR]

I quite agree with BPF, any spinning past one turn, other than in an aerobatic training environment, is a useless activity. Spins are a vitally important maneuver for a pilot to learn - up to one turn. I spin regularly, but it's bee decades since I deliberately went past one turn. I have accidentally gone past one turn in a few types, when my recovery technique was sloppy - Cessna 206 at full aft C of G was the most memorable. Spin recovery is why the aircraft is rigged with all of that available down elevator, which you otherwise spend your entire flying career wondering how you would ever use. I have had full nose down applied and held, along with full rudder, a few times. It is not a nice feeling to have full controls held, knowing you have nothing more, and waiting to see if it works.

Under suitably qualified supervision, and in accordance with the aircraft limitations, go and spin, but be content with one turn spins....

[trey kule]

Opposite rudder alone won't do it. You have to release back pressure on the control column or stick to get both wings flying again. Opposite rudder alone may stop the auto-rotation, but the wing will remain stalled if you do not release back pressure.

Release the back pressure? What happens if the plane stalled and spun with no back pressure on the control column?
You are learning spin recovery technique. I think the FTM correctly states...positive brisk forward pressure or something similar...that is the proper

Am I being picky? No. To many pilots and, unfortunately instructors, dont use the proper recovery technique. Take a few minutes and read the FTM..pretty good advice there

[Big Pistons Forever]

For an aircraft that is certified for spins the testing only extends to 6 turns. Exceeding 6 turns means you are now a test pilot.

To be fair, he certainly isn't the first person to do this... And it is certified for 6 but it doesn't mean it hasn't been tested for more.

Yes but you don't know "how much more" that testing continued so you have no basis to make an informed decision as to how many turns is too many. Up to and including six turns Cessna has proven to the FAA that the aircraft will recover in the parameters specified in FAR 23, that is why I stand by my contention that you should never spin a 150 past 6 turns.

In any case the C 150M POH has the following statement in Section 4

Quote

For the purpose of training in spins and spin recoveries, a 1 to 2 turn spin is adequate and should be used

Unquote

[AuxBatOn]

My point is that saying he is a "test pilot" is he goes past 6 turns is a little over-dramatic.

[Big Pistons Forever]

My point is that saying he is a "test pilot" is he goes past 6 turns is a little over-dramatic.

Operating an aircraft out side of its certificated parameters is IMO exactly the definition of what a "test pilot" does so I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one

[AuxBatOn]

I don't think it's the definition of "Test Pilot" but it's getting off-topic...

[PilotDAR]

My point is that saying he is a "test pilot" is he goes past 6 turns is a little over-dramatic.

Perhaps, but a pilot exceeding a six turn spin will certainly be getting into "requires unusual skill" territory. My experience has been that a few pilots who think that they have unusual skill actually do. Do you want to determine if you have unusual skill, while spinning down?

[AuxBatOn]

How do you judge that you need exceptionnal skills? The guy on the video certanly doesn't seem to have exceptionnal skills.

[PilotDAR]

The guy in the video had some luck, nothing went wrong, and he was spinning about the most tolerant training aircraft flying.

The spin certified aircraft I can think of meet this requirement:

(1) The airplane must recover from any point in a spin up to and including six turns, or any greater number of turns for which certification is requested,

If the the manufacturer has demonstrated six turns as being recoverable, but not more, a pilot who flies more than six turns will be doing something with the aircraft for which it has not demonstrated compliance - No assurance as to how it will respond to recovery.

I can say from experience that the "unusual skill" aspect may creep in when the recovery is near the limitations of the aircraft. Several aircraft I have spun have had to be momentarily flown at less than one G when initiating recovery. The post recovery dive involved a pull out at several G and close to Vne. The Grand Caravan I tested dove AT Vne and 2.8 G following recovery. There's not much room left there for casual skills, and zero time to think about changing a plan which is not working. I don't see a G meter in the video. If an overspeed were about to happen, how would the pilot know how much more he could pull to prevent it?

There are posters here with a lot more spinning experience than I, I listen to them. I spin enough to maintain the basic proficiency, and I always spin within the certification capability of the aircraft. If a pilot would spin beyond the recommended practice for the aircraft, what else would they attempt in it?

[AuxBatOn]

I am not suggesting to go against manifacturer recommendations. I am saying that it is a little over-dramatic to call people doing so "test pilots" or saying they require exceptionnal skills.

[Big Pistons Forever]

How do you judge that you need exceptionnal skills? The guy on the video certanly doesn't seem to have exceptionnal skills.

I am puzzled by your take on this. The C 150 POH recommends 1 to 2 turns are all that is required for spin entry and recovery training. The certification regime ensures a safe recovery is assured up to 6 turns. This pilot chose to continue past that and recovered with the appearance of no extra skill required this time

So are you saying you OK with this scenario ?

[AuxBatOn]

Read the previous. The over-exageration is what I have issues with. He is not a test pilot nor does he have exceptionnal flying skills. At least we can't tell from the video.

Judgement? Probably not hs forte.

[PilotDAR]

In the context of this discussion, I think that the term "test pilot" is being used sarcastically, and in a un complementary way. I certainly would be embarrassed to be branded a "test pilot" in the context that this fellow has. Real test pilots approach most maneuvers with planning, and great caution. They have a keen awareness of what the surprises could be around that corner, and a plan to mitigate them. One major way for test pilots to stay on the safer side, is to carry needed instrumentation. Seven turn spin pilot did not equip the aircraft with an accelerometer. If he got into a serious dive, how would he know how much to pull to prevent passing the red line, without wrinkling the plane? If you had wisely equipped with a G meter, and you were about to exceed a limitation in a dive, would you choose to overspeed or over G? If you had chosen to spin (or other maneuver which could result in a dive recovery) and climbed into nice smooth air for the entry, will the air at the recovery altitude still be as smooth?

If you have chosen to take an aircraft into a maneuver which the certification and flight manual procedures do not approve, you're on your own. You might not think you're testing the plane, but you're at least testing yourself!

[CFR]

I understand the tested up to 6 turns issue, but is that because by that point it has stabilized and doesn't change from that point on (Ie: is 6 different from 7, 8 or 20?) or is there a legitimate reason to expect something unusual at 7 or more?

As to how airplanes spin and correct recovery, not all airplanes recover the same.

Count the turns in this video after recovery input has been applied.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsFkpkVxCxk

Here is the info from the POH

-------------------------------------------------
3.7 ERECT SPIN RECOVERY
3.7.1 Standard Recovery Technique
a) Close the throttle.
b) Raise the flaps.
c) Check direction of spin on the turn co-ordinator.
d) Apply full rudder to oppose the indicated direction of turn.
e) Hold ailerons firmly neutral.
f) Move control column progressively forward until spin stops.
g) Centralise rudder.
h) Level the wings with aileron.
i) Recover from the dive.
WARNING
WITH C OF G AT REARWARD LIMIT THE PILOT MUST BE PREPARED TO
MOVE CONTROL COLUMN FULLY FORWARD TO RECOVER FROM SPIN.

3.7.2 Incorrect Recovery

> A high rotation rate spin may occur if the correct recovery procedure is not followed,
particularly if the control column is moved forward, partially or fully, BEFORE the
application of full anti-spin rudder. Such out-of-sequence control actions will delay
recovery, and increase the height loss. If the aircraft has not recovered within 2
complete rotations after the application of full anti-spin rudder and fully forward control
column, the following procedure may be used to expedite recovery.
a. Check that FULL anti-spin rudder is applied.
b. Move the control column FULLY AFT – then SLOWLY FORWARD until the spin
stops.
c. Centralise the controls and recover to level flight, (observing the “g” limitations).

-------------------------------------

I have done many successful spins in this A/C and only 1 eventually successful recovery (the spin continued for more than 2 turns after recovery inputs) after following the incorrect recovery procedure.

I would much rather spin a Citabria (1/4 turn and you're out)

[PilotDAR]

is there a legitimate reason to expect something unusual at 7 or more?

My experience with national rule making (and I've had some in this realm) is that often a "number" in a standard is a conservative "best guess" by the rule makers. In this case, the CAR 3 and FAR 23 spin standard will be based upon what the FAA decided was needed decades back, and that is frequently based upon an awareness of a prior military specification which was suitable.

As has been said here, and quoted from a POH, there is no value in continuing a spin much past two turns. I have spun dozens of type of planes over the decades, and I have only once spun (a 150 Aerobat) to six turns - just so I knew what it was like. There is zero value, and a lot of risk meddling around at these corners of the aircraft capability. And, it's just really unkind to engines to drag the plane that high at full power, into cooler air, and close the throttle for a prolonged idle power descent.

The point of spin training is to get in, hold the turn needed to stabilize and recognize, then get out neatly. If you've blundered past three turns doing that, something is wrong.

I have always been amused to read the "limitation" of G forces, when most aircraft have zero means to indicate nor record them!

[cgzro]

I understand the tested up to 6 turns issue, but is that because by that point it has stabilized and doesn't change from that point on (Ie: is 6 different from 7, 8 or 20?) or is there a legitimate reason to expect something unusual at 7 or more?

Fuel moves and changes the polar moment of inertia and you can get bobbing effects that wax and wane. Its also possible for the engine to stop depending on rotation direction and fuel quantity.
All of the above can change the spin characteristics. Another worry is the cold windscreen entering warm moist air as you descend with the resulting humidity forming and partially blocking your vision:)

[Gene Hasenfus]

"limitation" of G forces, when most aircraft have zero means to indicate nor record them!

I've always found wrinkles in the skin to be
a pretty reliable indication.



Above is a Hawker, known in the industry as
a pretty delicate aircraft.

[PilotDAR]

I've always found wrinkles in the skin to be
a pretty reliable indication.

Gee, I hope you have 't found that too often, it's a pretty expensive way to gauge your flying technique! Aircraft will wrinkle momentarily as G is pulled, though I've never had the wrinkles stay there myself. I hope you weren't spinning that Hawker when you wrinkled it!

[Gene Hasenfus]

Apparently the delivery pilot spent his trip across
the Gulf of Mexico snap-rolling it, to relieve the
boredom.

Famous incident. I'm a bit puzzled you weren't
aware of it. N167DD.

Hawker 800XP snap rolled 3 to 4 times. Ripples are 1 to 2 inches deep and run almost the entire length of the aircraft on both sides. The fuse windows weren't level anymore when you stood back and looked at them. I heard it torqued so bad that the interior galley drawers and cabinets were jammed and wouldn't open. Don't know if that is true though.

You can see that area just above the wing roots, they are rippled from the leading edge to the trailing edge. I can tell you that where the wings mate to the fuselage, it is like ripple city and the rivets and screws look as if they were riding on waves. In between each window, the same ripples as the other side.

Story:This is what I was told by the people that were there when the plane rolled in. They are employees of the FBO and know the owner and everyone involved.

It came from Mexico back to FXE, the captain that flew it back was a licensed Mexican pilot with no FAA licenses or ratings. The captain was hired as a contract pilot just for this trip. The first officer was from here and he was also just used as a contract pilot to get the plane back here.

When the got back to FXE, where the owner was waiting, of course they flipped out as the plane rolled into parking. The captain or the first officer had no idea of the damage that was caused, and when asked what happened he apparently said he made a hard landing. Yet, the tires and gear were fine. The FAA and insurance had questioned them on what happened and they stuck to their story for 9 days.

Finally, the first officer talked, which was a good decision for him. He said that the Captain wanted to snap roll it, and not aileron roll it, like a Pitts. Supposedly it was done 3 to 4 times. By the time the first officer had talked the captain was back in Mexico.

Not sure what the FAA is going to do with the first officer though. He will probably get a pass, as it is not his fault he was flying with a scum bag Captain.

More to the Story:New pictures and a story update. Spoke with the mechanics working on it today. Still actually not sure id it will fly again, they are still tearing into it. Found out yesterday that the right wing is history, because it is bent beyond repair. You can actually see it up close, where the aluminum is actually stretched and separating at some points.

Story Update:They did roll it 4 times. What caused all the damage was when on the last two rolls, the pilot got scared and cranked the yoke back the other way to the the roll and go back upright. He got about halfway around and got scared then jerked it back really hard, and that is what twisted everything, instead of continuing the roll in the original direction. What is funny is that he got scared on roll 3, then tried again and got scared. So it was severely twisted two times.

The wing is trashed and the wing root is twisted.

Hard to see in the picture, but there is a very obvious wrinkle in the nose cone on the right side. They haven't gotten to that part of the frame yet.

Left side was the worst. The windows may never be perfectly even.

The bottom of the tail cone area had a bend in it and some wrinkles. Empennage may be bent inside also, but they are still checking.

Engines and pylons were ok, but a couple of mounts are being replaced because of the stress. They haven't checked the airframe around the windscreens yet, and that could be a deal breaker.

I understand there were plenty of indications
of the G limit being exceeded.