Dear Readers,
The Certified Flight Instructor (CFI)
plays a critical role in ensuring every pilot being
instructed and evaluated by them is ultimately safe and
safety conscious. As CFIs, our assessment of a pilots
proficiency status comprehends a wide spectrum including: flight
preparation, aeronautical knowledge, recency of
experience, regulatory awareness and compliance, system
management, stick and rudder skill, aeronautical
decision-making and mental attitude. In General
Aviation, the CFI commonly represents the measuring
stick by which most pilots compare their piloting
capability to the ideal. This is a tremendous
responsibility that CFIs should not take lightly.
Having said those high sounding words,
does that mean every CFI knows everything all the time?
No, and they are not expected to. However, they must be
firmly grounded in all skills and knowledge requirements
of the PTS as well as be familiar with how to find
information on any topic within their professional
domain.
In this article I would like to address
one specific aspect of a CFIs range of
safety-evaluation responsibilities Regulatory
Compliance. Specifically, we are going to investigate why
performing spin training in a normal category
single-engine certified aircraft is an unsafe practice.
Additionally, well highlight some of the reasoning
behind established regulations related to "stall spin"
awareness.
Hangar Talk:
Aside from aircraft certification
requirements that normal
category single-engine aircraft
be fully recoverable within a
one-turn spin, what really is the
risk of doing spins in them?
Pilots well versed in AC 61-67C, or
have recently read the placards posted in plain view in
their normal or utility category aircraft, may wonder why
this topic is coming up.
COCKPIT PLACARDS
Normal Category:
"No acrobatic maneuvers, including
spins, approved."
Utility
Category Not Meeting Acrobatic Certification:
Spins Prohibited
(Note: Not all utility category aircraft are
spins-approved)
So whats the issue? If the posted
placards and published maneuvering limitations of the
normal category aircraft say dont do spins, then dont
do them right? Right. That is 100% correct. Youve
passed this short regulatory compliance exam. Simply
put; dont intentionally spin airplanes that arent
approved for spins. If you passed the test then you can
stop reading here. If you didn't pass then please keep
reading and keep in mind that this article is intended
to inform as well as offer food for thought in relation
to your actions and teachings related to both stall and
spin training.
Statistics on "STALL Spin"
Knowledge and Recovery
Over the years there have been many
diligent efforts made to ascertain the average
instructor's knowledge level related to "stall spin"
dynamics, regulations and recoveries. The results of a
few are listed below. If you find yourself falling into
a statistic that indicates a possible shortcoming in
"stall spin" knowledge, resist the temptation to feel reassured that
many others are in the same situation. When it comes to
"stall spin" awareness, "comfort
in groups" or "but I know other people who do the same
thing I do", is not an answer you should be contented with.
Regrettably, we are all a product of our training and
opinions. To a certain extent, how we were trained is
not our fault - however, when it comes to safety and
regulatory compliance "not knowing" or "being unaware"
of the rules and regulations is not an acceptable
explanation
for violating them unintentionally or otherwise. Neither
the FAA nor insurance companies have much tolerance
during an accident investigation in the area of
published safe flying regulations and practices.
1976 General Aviation Pilot
Stall Awareness Training Study*
Survey of 75 CFIs attending a Flight
Instructor Refresher Clinic revealed that only 30% of
the instructors present would not spin a Normal category
aircraft despite intentional spins being prohibited in
Normal category airplanes.
1993 Transportation Research: Re-Examination of
Stall/Spin Prevention Training*
Questionnaires were distributed in
CFIs at 43 flight schools in Tennessee, Mississippi,
California and Utah as well as to instructors who
attended seven FAA safety seminars and three Flight
Instructor Refresher clinics. In total, 513 civilian
flight instructors and 28 designated examiners
participated. The surveys were processed by five
aviation professionals - all flight instructors with
college education in aerodynamics. NASA research,
journal literature, and the textbook "Aerodynamics for
Naval Aviators" were used as references: Results of
surveying this Certified Flight Instructors and
Designated Examiners are listed below:
-
94% relied primarily on popular
literature for "stall spin" information (ie. aviation
magazines)
-
96% additionally relied heavily on
their own instructors
-
95% failed to ever receive
training in either spin dynamics or the likely
conditions preceding an inadvertent spin
-
94% did not understand spin
certification requirements nor the limitations
imposed as a result
-
98% indicated that their formal
spin training consisted of no ground instruction and
a mere two spins - one in each direction
Despite the above statistics, all
these instructors readily received logbook endorsements
certifying they were competent to teach spins.
The same study revealed the following general
conclusions:
In the same survey, these instructors
and examiners self-assessed their understanding of
"stall spin"
dynamics as "Excellent". The survey results clearly
indicate that those charged with the task of teaching
and testing new pilots possess a marginal understanding
of "stall spin" phenomena.
2005 Stall/Spin Study by
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University*
An internet based questionnaire
evaluated 468 flight instructors on spin training, spin
experience and their individual "stall spin" knowledge.
The conclusions broke down as follows:
-
Spin Experience
-
56% had received 1 hour or
less of ground instruction prior to receiving
spin endorsements
-
36% performed 4 or less spin
entries prior to receiving their spin
endorsement
-
59% had hands-on spin
experience in only 1 or 2 different models of
airplanes
-
38% had not practiced spins
since becoming an instructor
-
"stall spin" Knowledge
* Reference:
The Light Airplane
Pilots Guide to Stall/Spin Awareness,
Chapter 7: Who's Spinning In
The thought process for some pilots,
and even Certified Flight Instructors, who make
the decision to push beyond approved stall training and
into the regime of
spin
training lies within their interpretation of the
normal category spin certification description. Assuming
the aircraft in question does not fall under the
classification of being Spin Resistant or meets
Equivalent Level of Safety (ELOS) criteria to meet
certification, those
familiar with certification requirements are aware that
a normal category single-engine aircraft is spin-tested
to be recoverable from up to a one-turn or 3-second spin
(whichever takes longer). As stated clearly in AC 61-67C
Chapter 4 (below), this is not permission or
authorization for any pilot or CFI to perform
intentional spins in those aircraft.
AC 61-67C: Chapter 4:
Airworthiness Standards
400. Operating Limitations.
a. Normal Category. Normal
category airplanes are
not approved
for the performance of acrobatic maneuvers,
including spins, and are placarded against
intentional spins. However, to provide a
margin of
safety when recovery from a stall is delayed,
normal category airplanes are tested during
certification and must be able to recover from a one
turn spin or a 3-second spin, whichever takes
longer, in not more than one additional turn with
the controls used in the manner normally used for
recovery or demonstrate the airplanes resistance to
spins
[emphasis added]
NOTE: Since airplanes certificated
in the normal category have not been tested for more
than a one turn or 3-second spin, their performance
characteristics beyond these limits are unknown.
This is the
reason they are placarded against intentional spins.
[emphasis added]
Sample CFI Question: So
whats the big deal? If the aircraft is recoverable from
a one-turn spin then why, as a CFI, cant I do one-turn
spins with my students? Afterall, the aircraft is certified to be
recoverable and I really think its important for my
students to be current on spin recovery. We dont have
access to an aerobatic aircraft locally and traveling to
find one is expensive and inconvenient.
Although this instructors interest
(above) in
providing spin awareness training to himself and his
students is admirable, he or she really needs to understand
the intent of requiring the normal category aircraft to
be recoverable form a one-turn spin. The reasoning is
discussed in the AC 61-67C Chapter 4,
Para 400a (above). The intent of the
one-turn spin recovery certification is solely to
provide a margin of safety when recovery from a stall is
delayed. This is not referring to
spin
training and the delay from the stall during
training should not be intentional. This margin of
safety is there for both students AND instructors.
AC 61-67C: Chapter 1:
Para 105: Stall Recovery
At the first
indication of a stall, the aircraft AOA must be
decreased to allow the wings to regain lift.
[emphasis added]
In properly administered stall
training in any aircraft, recovery should be initiated
at the first indication of the stall. Any intentional
decision by the pilot (who is about to become a Test
Pilot) to continue a stall, especially an uncoordinated
stall, beyond the first indication is moving themselves
out of stall training, into
spin
training and rapidly reducing the guaranteed margin
of error provided by certification of their normal
category aircraft.
In stall training the CFI must be on
his toes as the amount of time for an uncoordinated
stall to proceed beyond the one-turn recoverable
certification limit can be in as little as 3-seconds and
usually not more than 4 seconds. When considering the GA
training environment, a window of only 3 or 4 seconds
should be considered minimum. Assuming a cooperative
student in an ideal training environment where a typical
proper transfer of control takes approximately 2 seconds
from an uncoordinated stall, that leaves the CFI with as
little as a 1-2 second buffer zone to deal with any
number of irregularities such as; continued student
control input, incorrect stall recovery technique,
miscommunication, panic and fear responses.
Any Delay: The design margin of
error quickly becomes minimal to zero.
A spin is not just a stall despite the
fact that the only path to a developed spin is through
the stall, specifically, a prolonged uncoordinated
stall. A spin has significantly different
characteristics than a stall - so much so, that it is
considered to be a completely different flight condition
and has a completely different recovery procedure. In
the spin, the aircrafts wings are at stalled angles of
attack scribing a helical descending flight path while
the aircraft is established in a stabilized yaw-driven
auto-rotation that may, or may not, be recoverable.
Despite their best intentions, CFIs
presenting spin recovery as simply being stall recovery
from a prolonged stall with yaw are providing a
disservice to their students. Although it is true that a
stall recovery is effective in an uncoordinated stall
when applied at its first indication of occurrence, the
longer the application of stall recovery is delayed, the
more unlikely it will be effective. As a pilot moves out
of the world of single-engine certified normal category
aircraft into the world of light twin, very light jet
and bigger non-GA aircraft flying, the risk of putting
themselves in harms way from delaying immediate stall
recovery grows rapidly. The stall recovery techniques we
teach in general aviation in accordance with AC 61-67C
are fundamental to stall recovery considerations in all
fixed-wing aircraft.
Immediacy of Correct Action in stall recovery should
always be emphasized by the CFI.
Certified aircraft designs that are
flight-tested to recover from developed spins are
single-engine aerobatic aircraft and some single-engine
utility aircraft when flown within the proper weight and
balance limitations prescribed for intentional spinning
flight. More often than not, aircraft other than those
listed above have not been certified, or even
flight-tested, to recover from spins. Every reputable
spin recovery training program and instructor must
educate pilots on this fact and emphasize the best spin
recovery is to recognize and avoid the stall before it
starts. If a stall does occur, immediately execute a
proper stall recovery before yaw is allowed to couple
with stalled angle of attack long enough to move the
aircraft into the potentially unrecoverable
developed-spin regime of flight.
Defining an Inadvertent Spin
When doing our approved stall
training and the PTS calls for employing a
cross-controlled stall, the decision on whether the
aircraft has transitioned into an inadvertent spin is
sometimes ambiguous and can vary significantly between
aircraft types. The definition below, provided by the
Council on Unusual Attitude Training & Education,
can be considered for use by CFIs.
Inadvertent Spin: An unintentional departure from
controlled flight that involves simultaneously stalling
and yawing, and that involves a change in bank angle of
60 degrees or a change in heading greater than 30
degrees1 with an accompanying rate of change
in bank angle or heading of at least 90 degrees per
second.2
Furthermore, an intentional spin evolves into an
unintentional spin the moment the pilot becomes
disoriented, or the moment the pilots mind becomes
disengaged from the physical actions taken by the
pilots body, or the moment the pilot decides to abort
the spin attempt, or the moment the spin proceeds beyond
the point the pilot had intended.
Sources:
1
FAA General Aviation Pilot Stall Awareness Training
Study (1976), p. 6.
2
14 CFR Part 23 (1993),
Section 23.221(a)(2)(ii), p. 165.
The proper stall recovery for your
aircraft should be published in the Aircraft Operating
Instructions. The fundamental sequence of actions taken
in a stall recovery are common to most fixed wing
aircraft (See:
All-Attitude Upset Recovery Checklist). As this
article highlights, when faced with an impending stall
the sooner correct recovery action is taken the more
likely that a successful recovery will occur. Preferably
the stall should be avoided through the recognition of
developing symptoms rather than waiting until an actual
stall occurs. However, if faced with a stalled flight
scenario,
a stall can be identified by any of the following:
-
Significant airframe and/or control surface buffet
at speeds below Va
-
Lack of, or Reversal of, Pitch Authority
-
Lack of, or Reversal of, Roll Authority
-
Continuous aural or visual stall warning
CFI's must make an extra effort to be
thoroughly educated on stall recovery and ensure every
stage of the recovery is fully understood by their
students. Generalized actions to be taken in the stall
recovery can be summarized as follows:
-
PUSH - Reduce Angle of Attack:
Aggressively unload the aircraft through a
purposeful Push straightforward on the control
column to reduce the angle
of attack of the wing to below critical AOA to
eliminate this critical aerodynamic spin-risk
component*. The amount of elevator
movement and control pressure may vary from a simple
release of control column pressure to a distinct
push of 20-30 lbs or more in a nose-high autopilot
trimmed power-on stall condition in a transport
category aircraft. In a stall where the wings are
close to level (less than 45 degrees), the angle of
attack should only be reduced enough to get out of
the stall yet not so much so as to unnecessarily
induce a significant amount of altitude loss.
-
POWER - Make a Power Selection: The
power is typically selected to full thrust. There
are exceptions to this general guidance based on
aircraft design and configuration. Exceptions to
applying full power (or full thrust) in a stall
situation include situations such as; Vmc (a failed
engine) stall in a multi-engine aircraft,
high-powered single-engine propeller aircraft where
the manufacturer cautions the torque rolling effect
as being excessive in slow-speed high-AOA flight
conditions, and in large jet aircraft where the
manufacturer may require the reduction of power in
the stall recovery because of excessive nose-up
moments at full power in low-speed high-AOA
situations when the engines are mounted under the
wing.
-
RUDDER - Cancel Yaw with Rudder:
Apply a firm single application of rudder to cancel
yaw to attain coordinated flight. Remember, if the
aircraft is in a stall, the ball in the turn
coordinator is not reliable.
Visually arrest the yaw/roll
couple to eliminate this critical aerodynamic
spin-risk component*. It is important to
emphasize that rudder is NOT used to roll the
aircraft unless judiciously and properly combined
with aileron input in the ROLL step (next). This
recommended stall recovery DOES NOT advocate the
Step on the Sky technique as it unnecessarily
uncoordinates the aircraft, significantly increases
drag, may overstress the rudder assembly (especially
when above Va and/or the rudder is cycled) and has
marginal secondary roll response in comparison the
proper use of aileron as detailed in the next step.
-
ROLL - Re-orient the Lift Vector to the
Nearest Horizon: Using aileron, the lift
vector must be rolled to nearest horizon
immediately. In an overbanked scenario (above 45
degrees), the roll must be accomplished while
keeping the aircraft unloaded at low angle of attack
under positive G. Up to full control deflection must
be initiated to achieve the desired wings level
flight attitude in minimum time.
-
CLIMB - Initiate an Immediate Climb:
With the lift vector oriented in a wings-level
flight attitude, the pilot should now initiate an
aggressive pull on the control column to attain a
climbing Vy pitch attitude. Pilots must necessarily
manage AOA-onset to avoid the secondary stall when
below Va and manage G-onset to avoid exceeding the
aircrafts limit-load when above Va.
* NOTE:
Two critical aerodynamic factors must be present for an
aircraft to enter a spin: 1) AOA above critical (see PUSH
above), and 2) Continuous yaw (see RUDDER above).
Without both of these components present simultaneously,
an aircraft can not spin. A proper
stall recovery must aggressively resolve both factors.
In short; the role of the CFI out in
the field is spin-awareness and avoidance instruction
through thorough academic examination of the students
aeronautical knowledge and providing
regulatory-compliant stall training in accordance with
AC 61-67C. Additionally, the CFI should be educating
each student on the risk of incorrect stall recovery and
the importance of maneuvering each aircraft flown within
its approved operating envelope.
In all that we do as pilots and
instructors, insisting on a margin of safety must always
be integrated into practical operations and personal
training. Venturing into the regime of
spin
training by implementing intentional spins with a
normal category aircraft is in violation of the
aircrafts approved operating limitations. This practice
puts the instructor, and all aboard, in a scenario that
has very little, or no margin of safety.
Become a Referral Expert: As a
minimum, encourage your students and other pilots you
influence to participate in a spin training course in
approved aircraft given by expert instructors. A list of
established schools can be found on the
IAC website. Keep in mind that spin training is part
of the story but not all-inclusive when it comes to the
all-attitude all-envelope flight environment. The best
recommendation you can provide is to seek out an
Emergency Maneuver Training course founded on; thorough
"stall spin" awareness academics, upset recovery, a wide
variety of stall recovery, spin recovery and, if
recommending an instrument rated pilot, instrument
recovery training. A comprehensive Emergency Maneuver
Training course will additionally include integrated
aerobatic training with strong focus on developing
recovery skills in a crisis and extensive flight
envelope awareness. An aerobatics course alone is not at
all the same as, or equivalent to, a properly delivered
Emergency Maneuver Training or Upset Recovery Training
program. Prior to sending students to any particular
provider, be sure to call them to discuss their
instructor's experience level, aircraft used, depth of
instruction and demonstrated results.
Rich Stowell, MCFI-A, 2006
National CFI of the Year
Author:
Emergency Maneuver Training: Controlling Your Airplane
in a Crisis
Author:
The Light Airplane
Pilots Guide to Stall/Spin Awareness
When asked to comment on the subject
of this article Rich submitted the following excerpt
from his most recent book:
The Light Airplane
Pilot's Guide to Stall/Spin Awareness
Chapter 23: Taking Charge of Your
Education Risk Management
Strive to give yourself as great a
margin of safety as possible when flying, too. For
example, one frequently asked question is: can a
Normal category airplane be spun?? Yet
another is: can a Normal
category airplane be rolled?? The truthful answer to
both is yes, of course the airplane can be. But the real
question is should it be spun, or rolled, or anything
else if the airplane isnt approved for it?? Its not
about what happens if everything goes according to plan,
but what happens if something goes wrong. In the case of
spins, the difference in the margin of safety is one
turn in the Normal category versus up to six turns in
the Acrobatic category; unproven spin recovery
capability beyond one turn versus proven recovery
capability. From a structural standpoint, the
Normal
category airplane is limited to +3.8 gs before metal
might start to bend, whereas the Acrobatic category
airplane might have a +6.0 g limit. Thus a botched
maneuver in a Normal
category airplane (perhaps resulting from an unapproved
roll) risks structural problems much sooner compared to
the Acrobatic category airplane.
Eating into our margin of safety
increases risk; conversely, as our margin of safety
increases, risk decreases. It is of little value to have
plenty of altitude and possess the skills to apply the
correct recovery inputs if were going to intentionally
spin airplanes not approved for spins. It is likewise
also of little value to spin a spins-approved airplane
with insufficient altitude for recovery, or given enough
altitude and a recoverable airplane, to lack the
necessary recovery skills. Our margin of safety is tied
to the Trinity: altitude, airplane capability, piloting
skills. Acknowledging this and acting to achieve a
balance among these elements will improve the safety of
each flight operation.
Rich adds: There is ZERO margin for
error when spinning a Normal
category airplane. Plus, the experience may be
instilling a false sense of security in pilots doing it.
What's to stop someone who adopts that mindset from
loading up a Cessna 182 with four people and baggage for
a cross country, and along the way saying, hey, watch
this!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As a CFI we must always be cognizant
of the various Laws of Learning during the instruction
and evaluation of other pilots. For example, the Law of
Primacy often creates the most lasting impression as
first impressions are persistent ones. Additionally,
following the Law of Recency, pilots tend to do things
the way theyve done them recently. Wrapping it up with one
more, pilots in the long-term tend to do things in
accordance with the Law of Exercise that asserts what we
do most often is usually the best learned. Having said
that, think about the students you are teaching. What
are they learning about "stall spin" training first, most
recently and most often? Can what you teach be looked up in an
official aviation training publication of some kind? If
not, it should be.
The nice thing about stall training in
accordance with AC 61-67C is that the general recovery
principles remain consistent across the spectrum of
fixed wing aircraft including GA, large, business jet
and airline category machines. General philosophy;
reduce angle of attack, make a power decision, cancel
yaw with rudder, re-orient the lift-vector towards the
sky and initiate a climb. In each and every aircraft you
fly, every CFI or authorized instructor must be
emphasizing recognition, avoidance and, if necessary,
immediate stall recovery. Note the repeated emphasis on
immediate.
So what about the pilot moving up from
the single-engine GA aircraft where they make the potentially fatal thought You
know, I
really need to be sure Im safe from spinning my new
Cessna 421, so I think Im going to go do some one-turn
spin recoveries. Is that a thought that could occur?
Although very wrong and potentially deadly that type of
thinking does happen. Too often. If they erroneously
learned Spins-Prohibited equals One-Turn Spins-Approved,
why would their thinking change? Having trained thousands of pilots
in unusual attitude and spin recovery training, youd be
surprised how many pilots make a similar initial call
to our office
saying; Im concerned about safety when flying my
family around so I think its really important that I
learn how to recovery from spins in my Beech Baron (or a
similar light twin). I used to do one-turn spins with my
instructor in my Piper Arrow but Id like to have an
instructor with me in my new aircraft before I try it on
my own. How thankful we are when these pilots call as
theyve taken the first step on the road to safety and
education. It is calls like these that affirm
the importance of "stall spin" awareness and
recovery training by approved highly-qualified experts.
Twin engine airplanes are not
evaluated for spin recoverability during testing for
certification. The
only requirement as stated in the Flight Test Guide AC
23-8A is that twin engine airplanes can not display an
"undue tendency" to spin from an unaccelerated, wings
level stall with the critical engine failed. It
is common practice during stalls in multi-engine
aircraft in this configuration to select power to idle
in the recovery.
For example: In response to a number
of flat spin accidents in the Beech Baron, the US Army
spin tested the airplane in 1974. One of the most
noteworthy published findings was that it took less than
one second for the airplane to spin following a
single-engine stall. Immediate recovery action was
needed to avoid spinning. In 1998 and 2002 the
Raytheon Aircraft Company published safety communiqués
reporting the results of 229 spins in Baron Models 58
and 58P. With the windmilling left engine idle with max
continuous power on the right engine throughout the
stall, entry to beyond 270 degrees of rotation, the spin
was unrecoverable requiring the deployment of the spin
chute. Part of Raytheon's published recommendations was:
-
"During single-engine operation
(actual or simulated), at the first indication of
approach to stall (the stall warning horn,
buffeting, or both) stall recovery must be initiated
immediately ... if this instruction is not followed,
a stall will occur and a dangerous spin is likely to
occur"
The simple answer is that intentional
spins in Normal category aircraft are not approved. As a
professional CFI, this statement alone should keep us
from ever even considering doing an intentional spin in
a normal category aircraft, or worse, recommending that
others do it. The fact that a normal category aircraft is
certified to be recoverable from a one-turn (or
3-second) spin is most definitely not an authorization
to violate the Spins Prohibited maneuvering limitation
of these aircraft. The one-turn spin recoverability is
only to add a margin of safety in regulatory compliant
stall recovery training.
Following the same philosophy it
should be obvious that training to prepare pilots to
effectively recovery from a one-turn spin (the absolute
maximum certified limit of recoverability in a normal
category aircraft) should ONLY be done in aircraft that
offer a margin of error. Spins-approved Utility category
and Aerobatic category aircraft within their
spins-approved certified weight and balance limits are
the only aircraft that should be used for spin training
of any kind. There is a reason why CFIs, Designated
Examiners and FAA Examiners do not evaluate CFI
candidates in their ability to recovery from spins in a
Normal category aircraft. The reason: Intentional
spins are prohibited.
AC
61-67C: Chapter 3: Flight
Training: Spins
300.
Spin Training
a. Spin Training must be
accomplished in an aircraft that is approved for
spins.
c. Spin Avoidance Training
Performance is considered unsatisfactory if it
becomes necessary for the instructor to take control
of the aircraft to avoid a fully developed spin.
For CFIs still not convinced
to stop spin training in Normal category aircraft,
let's step it up a notch on behalf of your future
students and passengers who don't know better
First, I strongly urge you to stop this practice.
Secondly, despite the fact the regulations tell
you not to do it, it is a prohibited maneuver, I'm telling you not to do it, every reputable CFI spin instructor is
telling you not to do it, every Master CFI-Aerobatic is
telling you not to do it, the FAA & Designated Pilot
Examiners wont do it
there are still some among you that
will still say I am going to do it. Consider this: However you justify
doing what your doing when spinning a normal category
aircraft, be certain to use some other reason than being
in the name of safety of flight. You are free to risk
your own life by violating regulation and may have even
found that youve been successful in the past based on
your skill and familiarity with your specific aircraft.
Regulations and approved maneuver limitations comprehend
information and safety practices that may not be readily
apparent to all pilots or CFIs. The only way to ensure
your safety is to know and comply with the limitations
published for your aircraft.
Final Question: Can you spin a Normal category aircraft? As Master Flight
Instructor Rich Stowell explains nicely (above); Yes. But
you can not do it legally, not for more than one turn, not without
zero margin of error and not without counting on
flawless spin recovery techniques. Following the
practice of offering spin training in a normal category
aircraft puts yourself, and those with you, at grave
risk both during your intentional spin in violation of
regulation and even more so when your student or fellow
CFI is out by himself, or with friends, practicing
one-turn spin recovery based on your recommendation to
do so. Maybe your spin recovery technique is perfect but
what about others you teach to do the same, is their
technique perfect? I can tell you personally from
training thousands of pilots in spin avoidance and
recovery that their technique is not perfect (far from
it), neither is yours nor is mine.
In closing, we all need a margin of
safety in "stall spin" avoidance and recovery training, so be sure you have one.
Emphasize immediate recovery in all stall training and
ensure you, as well as all pilots you influence, seek
quality spin training in a spins-approved aircraft
provided by qualified spin instructors. Fly safe and be
prepared. Q
Please leave comments on this article using our
Feedback Form ...
