Spins before solo?

[Big Pistons Forever]

The turn onto final scenario , I think, is generally is caused by the incorrect use of rudder to tighten the turn and thus cross controlling the aircraft. There is no need to add 10 knots for safety. Learn to fly a co ordinated turn, and know when to do an overshoot if you are not lined up properly. It is alesson that I don’t think is given much emphasis.

Exactly right

[the-minister31]

Remember that what is essential to teach is the "incipient spin". Otherwise known as the spin entry, or aggravated stall.

The focus is clear, teach the guy to keep it straight and not stall and show them how to not make their situation worst if they @#$! up before they go alone. That's what TC wants.

In other words, it is essential that students understand how to avoid a stall (exercice 12), how to properly control the aircraft close to a stall (exercice 11) and how to recover from a stall (12 again), whether the wing drops or not (exercice 13) before the first solo.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

I'm curious, I don't think it's actually been brought up yet.

What is the argument for not teaching spin recovery before a first solo, aside from the possibility that it may not be a legal requirement?

I had an incipient spin turning base to final on my 11th solo flight 25 years ago, while still training in gliders, and I believe fully that it was the rather comprehensive spin training that saved my ass that day. I didn't understand what was happening exactly, just that both my left wing and the nose suddenly dropped and the stick got very mushy very quickly. I was able to recover only because it was drilled into me.

The point is - it could have just as easily happened on my first solo flight. But to be fair, I may be a lousy pilot.

[2R]

The AC -61-67C answers the first part of your question , the second part is usually because the approach speeds of gliders are much closer to the stall than certified training aircraft .

[digits_]

I'm curious, I don't think it's actually been brought up yet.

What is the argument for not teaching spin recovery before a first solo, aside from the possibility that it may not be a legal requirement?

That's a question worth asking.

The main reason, for me, would be when a student is learning to fly in an airplane type not certified for intentional spins, as mentioned in earlier posts. At that point, it's not only useless, but also detrimental to student progress.

More generally speaking, for the standard 172 flying school student, I'd consider it mostly a waste of time in the pre solo phase. Once the student has some basic skills, you're most likely working towards safe landings. The student also knows that the first solo is approaching. At that that point, when safely able, you need to get it over with to progress the learning curve. Students are generally either eager to solo, in which case other exercises won't get all the needed attention because they want to solo, or they are a bit afraid to solo, in which case extra exercises don't help addressing the elephant in the room: the First Solo.

Another reason to consider, is that stalls and spins rarely happen at an expected time when flying. When reading accident reports, the stalls and spins snuck up on the unfortunate pilot because he was distracted, either for no good reason or because he was dealing with an (un)related system failure. When students go on a first solo flight, the flight only lasts -hopefully- a few minutes. They are most likely watching everything in the airplane like a hawk. If a spin were to happen in that scenario, there is no chance they'll recover.

The chances for a stall and a spin happening at that point, is also so low, that the cons outweigh the possible pros in my opinion.

Demonstrating the incipient spin and wing drop in turn to final to a pre solo student can be very beneficial, depending on the student's character and attitude. It will most certainly have an effect on the student's confidence. It depends on which direction you want to modify the student's confidence whether or not you should ideally demonstrate it pre solo, and in which way you do it.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

I'm curious, I don't think it's actually been brought up yet.

What is the argument for not teaching spin recovery before a first solo, aside from the possibility that it may not be a legal requirement?

That's a question worth asking.

The main reason, for me, would be when a student is learning to fly in an airplane type not certified for intentional spins, as mentioned in earlier posts. At that point, it's not only useless, but also detrimental to student progress.

More generally speaking, for the standard 172 flying school student, I'd consider it mostly a waste of time in the pre solo phase. Once the student has some basic skills, you're most likely working towards safe landings. The student also knows that the first solo is approaching. At that that point, when safely able, you need to get it over with to progress the learning curve. Students are generally either eager to solo, in which case other exercises won't get all the needed attention because they want to solo, or they are a bit afraid to solo, in which case extra exercises don't help addressing the elephant in the room: the First Solo.

Okay, I can see both points there.

Another reason to consider, is that stalls and spins rarely happen at an expected time when flying. When reading accident reports, the stalls and spins snuck up on the unfortunate pilot because he was distracted, either for no good reason or because he was dealing with an (un)related system failure. When students go on a first solo flight, the flight only lasts -hopefully- a few minutes. They are most likely watching everything in the airplane like a hawk. If a spin were to happen in that scenario, there is no chance they'll recover.

The chances for a stall and a spin happening at that point, is also so low, that the cons outweigh the possible pros in my opinion.

And I disagree on this point - as stated, I believe it was spin training that saved my ass. However, it was 25 years ago so my memory may be murky, and it was in a glider, which as mentioned previously, lands closer to stall speed than powered craft.

[digits_]

And I disagree on this point - as stated, I believe it was spin training that saved my ass. However, it was 25 years ago so my memory may be murky, and it was in a glider, which as mentioned previously, lands closer to stall speed than powered craft.

You did state it was your 11th solo flight. That's usually a time when new pilots start getting a bit complacent. Not saying that's what happened to you, but I do believe there is a bit of a different mindset between the 1st and 11th solo flight. You also said that you were flying gliders at that time. While technically still a first solo in a motorized airplane, I do think there is a diference between a "first solo in any airplane ever" and a "first solo in a motorized plane after having soloed in a glider".

There should be statistics about how many accidents, spin related or not, that occur during first solo flights. It would be interesting to read, and see if any of our theories hold up under scrutiny.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I'm curious, I don't think it's actually been brought up yet.

What is the argument for not teaching spin recovery before a first solo, aside from the possibility that it may not be a legal requirement?

That's a question worth asking.

The main reason, for me, would be when a student is learning to fly in an airplane type not certified for intentional spins, as mentioned in earlier posts. At that point, it's not only useless, but also detrimental to student progress.

More generally speaking, for the standard 172 flying school student, I'd consider it mostly a waste of time in the pre solo phase. Once the student has some basic skills, you're most likely working towards safe landings. The student also knows that the first solo is approaching. At that that point, when safely able, you need to get it over with to progress the learning curve. Students are generally either eager to solo, in which case other exercises won't get all the needed attention because they want to solo, or they are a bit afraid to solo, in which case extra exercises don't help addressing the elephant in the room: the First Solo.

Okay, I can see both points there.

Another reason to consider, is that stalls and spins rarely happen at an expected time when flying. When reading accident reports, the stalls and spins snuck up on the unfortunate pilot because he was distracted, either for no good reason or because he was dealing with an (un)related system failure. When students go on a first solo flight, the flight only lasts -hopefully- a few minutes. They are most likely watching everything in the airplane like a hawk. If a spin were to happen in that scenario, there is no chance they'll recover.

The chances for a stall and a spin happening at that point, is also so low, that the cons outweigh the possible pros in my opinion.

And I disagree on this point - as stated, I believe it was spin training that saved my ass. However, it was 25 years ago so my memory may be murky, and it was in a glider, which as mentioned previously, lands closer to stall speed than powered craft.

From what you described you took immediate action to recover as soon as the glider started to depart controlled flight. You used spin avoidance actions not spin recovery actions so I think we are really saying the same thing. If you had to use a full spin recovery to recover from a spin then you would almost certainly have been to low to recover and probably not be writing this now.

Your instinctive actions to regain control as soon as the aircraft started to depart from controlled flight are exactly what students pilots should be taught, which in your case you evidently were even though it wasn’t called spin avoidance training, that is what it was.

You don’t have to see the world make 2 complete in the windshield turns while holding pro spin control to learn that, and so as I have stated “spin” training that is using positive spin entry control movements and then holding them to allow a spin to develop is negative training outside of a proper aerobatic course.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

And I disagree on this point - as stated, I believe it was spin training that saved my ass. However, it was 25 years ago so my memory may be murky, and it was in a glider, which as mentioned previously, lands closer to stall speed than powered craft.

You did state it was your 11th solo flight. That's usually a time when new pilots start getting a bit complacent. Not saying that's what happened to you, but I do believe there is a bit of a different mindset between the 1st and 11th solo flight. You also said that you were flying gliders at that time. While technically still a first solo in a motorized airplane, I do think there is a diference between a "first solo in any airplane ever" and a "first solo in a motorized plane after having soloed in a glider".

There should be statistics about how many accidents, spin related or not, that occur during first solo flights. It would be interesting to read, and see if any of our theories hold up under scrutiny.

Yeah I still have that logbook; it was my 11th solo flight, 3 days after my first. You may be correct in thinking I could have been complacent by then. Let's not forget that I was still young and stupid 25 years ago. Now, I'm just no longer young.

In my case specifically, I wanted more thorough spin training before soloing in a powered craft, because the memory of those two seconds is still as vivid as if it happened yesterday. I don't recall being afraid of my first solo flight in a 2-33 at the age of 16, but I sure as hell recall being afraid of my first solo flight in that Grob 115 at the age of 41. Perhaps I wouldn't have been so afraid in the latter case had it not been for the first, and therefore not be making this argument?

(hah, both first solos were in Grobs)

So by your argument, digits, spin training should happen shortly after the first solo flight, assuming that doing it beforehand would be detrimental (as would be the case if a student was training in a non spin certified aircraft)? Before complacency and ego become too much of a factor? In that case, how much less detrimental would it be, to undertake spin training just after a first solo, if it had to be done in a different aircraft, than it would be before a first solo, assuming that it must be done regardless?

This all does assume of course that we agree pre-solo spin training is good, if it can be done in the aircraft a student is currently training in...

[PilotDAR]

you took immediate action to recover as soon as the glider started to depart controlled flight. You used spin avoidance actions not spin recovery actions

Honest question; what's the difference? As soon as the aircraft departed controlled flight, the correct control was applied to recover a spin - that's a correctly executed spin recovery. To me, "spin avoidance" is preventing the aircraft ever increasing AoA, uncoordinated, slower than 1.2Vs - no departure from controlled flight is involved, just avoiding getting there (also good).

For the interest of the group, during the planning for a flight test to show compliance following modification of a Grand Caravan, TC asked for spins to be flown - so I was called (someone heard I'd done this before). After understanding the nature of the mod, I proposed that the spin characteristics would not be affected. After a few weeks of back and forth, TC offered a compromise to me: 'Don't have to spin, but had to demonstrate spin resistance. Okay, what does that involve? ('cause it's not really spelled out in the standard). I was to stall the airplane from a climbing 30 bank turn in both directions, at 75% power, with one ball out cross controlled. I mentioned that I thought this really would be a spin entry, but for not having to hold it in for a turn, I agreed. It turned out that to get one ball out in this configuration, it was pretty well full pedal anyway. The Caravan handled it just fine, dropped a wing just past horizontal the other way, and recovered with very little heading change, when I initiated recovery. The plane gave me ample warning I was approaching a stall, and avoidance would have been easy. And, recovery was easy too. I hope that all new pilots, at some point during their learning seek out basic training in spin recovery. Sure, not two turns in the windshield, but recognition, and prompt recovery, just to build confidence.

Now, if we're going to point an airplane horribly down, let it turn while were doing it, then recognize and recover a spiral dive, is a spin recovery that much more difficult to execute if well trained? Are there more spin accidents than spiral dive accidents? I've certainly heard of both....

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

Okay, I can see both points there.

Another reason to consider, is that stalls and spins rarely happen at an expected time when flying. When reading accident reports, the stalls and spins snuck up on the unfortunate pilot because he was distracted, either for no good reason or because he was dealing with an (un)related system failure. When students go on a first solo flight, the flight only lasts -hopefully- a few minutes. They are most likely watching everything in the airplane like a hawk. If a spin were to happen in that scenario, there is no chance they'll recover.

The chances for a stall and a spin happening at that point, is also so low, that the cons outweigh the possible pros in my opinion.

And I disagree on this point - as stated, I believe it was spin training that saved my ass. However, it was 25 years ago so my memory may be murky, and it was in a glider, which as mentioned previously, lands closer to stall speed than powered craft.

From what you described you took immediate action to recover as soon as the glider started to depart controlled flight. You used spin avoidance actions not spin recovery actions so I think we are really saying the same thing. If you had to use a full spin recovery to recover from a spin then you would almost certainly have been to low to recover and probably not be writing this now.

Your instinctive actions to regain control as soon as the aircraft started to depart from controlled flight are exactly what students pilots should be taught, which in your case you evidently were even though it wasn’t called spin avoidance training, that is what it was.

You don’t have to see the world make 2 complete in the windshield turns while holding pro spin control to learn that, and so as I have stated “spin” training that is using positive spin entry control movements and then holding them to allow a spin to develop is negative training outside of a proper aerobatic course.

You are correct Pistons - it was spin avoidance, not recovery - and the difference there matters. The training I undertook in gliders spent an inordinate amount of time on incipient spins, or aggravated stalls. I was 300 or 400 feet AGL (I recall being slightly high on that approach) and had I entered a full spin, I would not be here. I corrected for an unexpected wing drop, not a spin.

It's a very specific case - anecdotal at best. But it's very difficult to argue against training that I think saved my life.

I suppose part of the point I'm trying to make is this: it wasn't entirely the spin training that saved me. It was, but it wasn't. It was the "Your aircraft is falling out of the sky - recover now, or you will die" training that gave me the confidence to not panic when that happened. To not include that training before soloing an aircraft, to me, is to assume that nothing will go wrong during a first solo flight. And this is, in my perhaps not-so-humble opinion, a dangerous assumption.

In simple terms, I believe that pre-solo spin training does more good than harm.

[digits_]

So by your argument, digits, spin training should happen shortly after the first solo flight, assuming that doing it beforehand would be detrimental (as would be the case if a student was training in a non spin certified aircraft)? Before complacency and ego become too much of a factor? In that case, how much less detrimental would it be, to undertake spin training just after a first solo, if it had to be done in a different aircraft, than it would be before a first solo, assuming that it must be done regardless?

This all does assume of course that we agree pre-solo spin training is good, if it can be done in the aircraft a student is currently training in...

I somehow assumed your spin was in a powered airplane, I misunderstood and looks like it was in a glider. Sorry if that caused confusion. I've never flown a glider, I'm not sure if spin training there would be more of a necessity than in powered airplanes.

If a student is flying a non spin certified airplane, I would do about 75% of the training without doing a spin, but focussing on the wing drop aspect of things, then do the spin flight, and then 25% getting (back) up to flight test standards.

If a student is flyign a spin certified airplane, I'd probably introduce full spins sooner, but not right after the first solo. There would be a lot of focus on stalls and wing drops though, so you'd be getting there anyway.

But that's just me.


(to clarify, I did demonstrate fully developed spins before the first solo for my Canadian students, because the school wanted me to, but given a choice, I wouldn't have)

[rookiepilot]

The turn onto final scenario , I think, is generally is caused by the incorrect use of rudder to tighten the turn and thus cross controlling the aircraft. There is no need to add 10 knots for safety. Learn to fly a co ordinated turn, and know when to do an overshoot if you are not lined up properly. It is alesson that I don’t think is given much emphasis.

And TC’s demand that a missed should generate a CADORS in some cases puts pressure on pilots to salvage an approach.

Excellent correction re the rudder inputs -- but I would also feel better adding the extra speed and bleed it off on final -- with a strong, gusty tailwind on base, and resulting possible inconsistent airspeed on final.

I'm also remembering that Cirrus accident where the pilot had multiple go arounds and then raised the flaps too soon on the final sequence, the gusty crosswind may have been an aggravating factor.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

So by your argument, digits, spin training should happen shortly after the first solo flight, assuming that doing it beforehand would be detrimental (as would be the case if a student was training in a non spin certified aircraft)? Before complacency and ego become too much of a factor? In that case, how much less detrimental would it be, to undertake spin training just after a first solo, if it had to be done in a different aircraft, than it would be before a first solo, assuming that it must be done regardless?

This all does assume of course that we agree pre-solo spin training is good, if it can be done in the aircraft a student is currently training in...

I somehow assumed your spin was in a powered airplane, I misunderstood and looks like it was in a glider. Sorry if that caused confusion. I've never flown a glider, I'm not sure if spin training there would be more of a necessity than in powered airplanes.

If a student is flying a non spin certified airplane, I would do about 75% of the training without doing a spin, but focussing on the wing drop aspect of things, then do the spin flight, and then 25% getting (back) up to flight test standards.

If a student is flyign a spin certified airplane, I'd probably introduce full spins sooner, but not right after the first solo. There would be a lot of focus on stalls and wing drops though, so you'd be getting there anyway.

But that's just me.


(to clarify, I did demonstrate fully developed spins before the first solo for my Canadian students, because the school wanted me to, but given a choice, I wouldn't have)

To clarify - I trained in gliders 25 years ago. I am now training in powered birds with the intention of making a career out of it. My first spin training was in gliders, and it was... intense. As in from level flight, "close your eyes... (3 turns later) Recover now!"... "Don't recover yet! Let it turn 3 more times, then recover!"... "Oops, this is a spiral! Recover now!" Cheeks sagging down my face and struggling to keep my head above my neck in the recovery kind of training. I recieved some pretty intense unusual attitude training and I am grateful for that to the point I don't think any student should be without it pre solo. The first time I did a power-on stall, it was.. lets just say... different. More violent.

The instructor I was recently training with spent a good deal of time on the falling leaf maneuver, which I felt was invaluable - it's basically incipient spin training (and this was in a Grob 115, a damned slippery aircraft), and you will always fail if you're just using the rudder. Valuable training IMHO.

I just don't see how spin training could possibly do more harm than good, even if needs to be done in a different plane. But my experience is not the norm, I think.

[Pilotdaddy]

I'm curious, I don't think it's actually been brought up yet.

What is the argument for not teaching spin recovery before a first solo, aside from the possibility that it may not be a legal requirement?

I suppose you could have a student who has shown sufficient stall and incipient spin recovery along with a good-enough-to-solo circuit and landing proficiency, yet hasn't been exposed to a fully developed spin.

I noticed that ceilings now do not come as easily as they did compared to just a couple of months ago. You could potentially have to delay someone's progress if you need to demonstrate the spin and need that 6000+ ceiling to do so. Alternatively, you could also just carry on with training, get them solo'd, and instead save the spin lesson on a nice clear afternoon later on down the line, if in fact there are no rules being broken.

[the-minister31]

I suppose you could have a student who has shown sufficient stall and incipient spin recovery along with a good-enough-to-solo circuit and landing proficiency, yet hasn't been exposed to a fully developed spin.

Remember that what is essential to teach is the "incipient spin". Otherwise known as the spin entry, or aggravated stall.

The focus is clear, teach the guy to keep it straight and not stall and show them how to not make their situation worst if they @#$! up before they go alone. That's what TC wants.

In other words, it is essential that students understand how to avoid a stall (exercice 12), how to properly control the aircraft close to a stall (exercice 11) and how to recover from a stall (12 again), whether the wing drops or not (exercice 13) before the first solo.

I noticed that ceilings now do not come as easily as they did compared to just a couple of months ago. You could potentially have to delay someone's progress if you need to demonstrate the spin and need that 6000+ ceiling to do so. Alternatively, you could also just carry on with training, get them solo'd, and instead save the spin lesson on a nice clear afternoon later on down the line, if in fact there are no rules being broken.

It is clearly stated in the PTR that spin must be done before First Solo, then again, the form on which PTR are based does not exist anymore on TC website (26-0313), yet it is still referenced in the CASS... No luck there.

CARS 405.24
In Exercice 18 (first solo), it states that every exercices specified in lesson plans 1 to 10 has to be taught before first solo. That includes "Incipient spins".

But the FIG also says “the personal instructional techniques of an individual flight instructor may be cause for modification of this syllabus...” So modifying the syllabus is still in accordance with the applicable Flight Instructor Guide.

It says that in regards of lesson plans, but if you go check Exercise 19 - first solo, there is one paragraph that states that you must complete ALL exercices dicted in lesson plan 1 to 10, including incipient spins, before authorizing a first solo.

[Pilotdaddy]

Couldn't you have demonstrated wing drops as part of lesson #12 (stalls)?

[the-minister31]

Couldn't you have demonstrated wing drops as part of lesson #12 (stalls)?

Well, the way I understand it is as soon as there is a wing drop, there is an autorotation. Autorotation = spin.

[Pilotdaddy]

Couldn't you have demonstrated wing drops as part of lesson #12 (stalls)?

Well, the way I understand it is as soon as there is a wing drop, there is an autorotation. Autorotation = spin.

Hmmm... Interesting. When I think of the spins lesson, it's not merely just a wing drop. It's at least a full rotation, maybe two, and then recovery.

When I think of a wing drop, yes what you said makes sense. However, in the context of the "stall" lesson, I would've assumed that wing drops would've already been covered and demonstrated there.

I can't see how recovery from a fully developed spin can help someone pre-solo, as if that ever happened in the circuit, it would be a little too late. Incipient spin recognition and avoidance, however, is very important and should've already been covered prior to the formal spin lesson.

[the-minister31]

Hmmm... Interesting. When I think of the spins lesson, it's not merely just a wing drop. It's at least a full rotation, maybe two, and then recovery.

thing is, TC do not want to cover the full spin pre-solo (it would be useless most of the time), but only the incipient, or entry. Entry begins at the beginning of autorotation up to stabilization of the spin

When I think of a wing drop, yes what you said makes sense. However, in the context of the "stall" lesson, I would've assumed that wing drops would've already been covered and demonstrated there.

both exercices are taught in the same lesson plans so it still checks out !

I can't see how recovery from a fully developed spin can help someone pre-solo, as if that ever happened in the circuit, it would be a little too late. Incipient spin recognition and avoidance, however, is very important and should've already been covered prior to the formal spin lesson.

Amen !

[photofly]

Exercise 19 of the FIG says “Before the first solo flight, ensure the student has received instruction in all exercises specified in Lesson Plans 1 to 10 in Part III of this Guide.”

It absolutely does not say “you must complete ALL exercices dicted in lesson plan 1 to 10” (My emphasis.)

It’s naughty of you to change “instruction in all exercises” to “complete all exercises”. The advice to instructors for exercise 13 isn’t clear on when, or even whether, any full spins need to be conducted.

[the-minister31]

Exercise 19 of the FIG says “Before the first solo flight, ensure the student has received instruction in all exercises specified in Lesson Plans 1 to 10 in Part III of this Guide.”

It absolutely does not say “you must complete ALL exercices dicted in lesson plan 1 to 10” (My emphasis.) It’s naughty of you to change “instruction in all exercises” to “complete all exercises”.

very true, my bad. Isn't relevant to the op's question being "is it mandatory" though

The advice to instructors for exercise 13 isn’t clear on when, or even whether, any full spins need to be conducted.

when talking about pre-solo, it's very clear that only Incipient spins are mandatory. The rest is up to the instructor IMO

[trey kule]

Naughty? That is hilarious. The kind of thing we used to see the folks at TC do all the time.

In reading over the posts here, it seems there is a lot of confusion of what actually is a spin.
I am not certain of the modern day definition, but we used to consider it a spin when the relative air flow was perpendicular to the ground.

At the point of stall the aircraft still has forward momentum, and the relative airflow is typically horizontal ( power off, level flight, de acceleration at 1kt/sec).

Once the aircraft is stalled and yawing, the wing drop will happen (cycle of control.,,right.)
And it will begin to rotate. Until it stabilizes, it is referred to as an incipient spin..not a spin...incipient defining it as the first part.
The FAA folks, understanding this, typically use the phrase “aggravated stall”

Anyway, the whole aim of teaching the low end of the speed regime, isto have the student learn to recognize and avoid getting into trouble. IMO, a student with three orfour hours of airtime is in no position to learn full spin recovery techniques from an intentional entry. Absolute waste of time pre solo.
When I look at the syllabus for the ppl, an instructor has about 30-32 hours of dual with the student to go through everything.
It only makes sense to teach the skills in an appropriate sequence and build-on the skill development.

As an aside, which never gets mention in these discussions is the psychological issues.
Many moons ago, I was tasked at an FTU to teach remedial training on spins both to ppl and cpl students. I Was dumbfounded that when you cut through the macho BS, a large percentage of students are , to say the least uneasy with doing spins. Once they get-by that, and trust their instructor not to play’ watch this,‘ or screw up, they get spins recovery in a flash.
My point being that taking someone up With just a few hours might be more than a bit premature a time to introduce an exercise and skill development that they are not going to need, or do them any good, until they get Into the solo portion of the upper air work...maybe. 6 hours or so after their first solo and with three hours of solo time to build confidence.

Photo...I wish you the good fight on this. Get it in writing from TC, and off you go.

[PilotStudy55]

Is there a rule that says a student has to complete an exercise on spins before flying solo?

Where i'm at I did spins before (have yet to solo) but like 10 flights ago? Took me longer with bloody slow flight... spins was a 0.8 hahaha. You'll do awesome man. It looks pretty bananas having every axis moving though.

As far as my understanding goes, most places teach spins but I believe the USA they're not mandatory.