CFI spin training?

[RPJ]

I am studying for CFI primary. Is it required that I must actually enter and recover from a spin in flight or can I just go through the motions describing exactly the maneuver without entering a spin?


Thanks,
Ryan

[chestercfi]

You can go to an authorized CFI for a spin training endorsement. He will take you through the motions of entry and recovery during the flight and most likely do some ground about spin awareness prior to the flight. The flight will consist of a few spins and he will check to make sure you have a general basis on what to do.

You will most likely not have do a spin on your test, primarily because you will find that the examiner does not want to do one in the plane. He may ask you about spin awareness and recovery during the oral, but its a very minor topic.

[caliginousface]

You will just get an endorsement from your CFI saying he completed spin training with you. If you screw up on your stall recovery, or your knowledge of stalls and/or spins on the ground is not up to par, he or she may fail you and ask you to come back with an airplane that is approved for spins.

Out here if you fail for one of those reasons and you must use two airplanes (complex for t/o's and landings, 152/172/etc. for the rest of the flight+spins), the inspector will come out to your airport.

YMMV

[seagull]

Originally Posted by RPJ

I am studying for CFI primary. Is it required that I must actually enter and recover from a spin in flight or can I just go through the motions describing exactly the maneuver without entering a spin?


Thanks,
Ryan

Why on earth would you be trying to not do actual spins?

[MusketeerMan]

From what I know...and had to do, yes, will have to get an airplane into an actual spin and recover from it. What good is a spin training endorsement if you haven't actually been in a spin??

[nosehair]

Originally Posted by chestercfi

You can go to an authorized CFI for a spin training endorsement. He will take you through the motions of entry and recovery during the flight and most likely do some ground about spin awareness prior to the flight. The flight will consist of a few spins and he will check to make sure you have a general basis on what to do.

Unfortunately, this is what it has come to..."just a few spins..."

The FAR that requires an endorsement for the CFI says you must "demonstarate instructional proficiency in stall awareness, spin entry, spins, and spin recovery."

"Instructional Proficiency" You must teach me spins. You must be my calm, cool, collected instructor who will put out a foot and push the opposite rudder when and if I do not respond in a timely manner and you must not let me see you sweat.

[MidlifeFlyer]

Originally Posted by RPJ

I am studying for CFI primary. Is it required that I must actually enter and recover from a spin in flight or can I just go through the motions describing exactly the maneuver without entering a spin?

They are real spins. Even though it tends to be a pretty minimal number, the idea is that you know enough to be able to teach them if necessary (that "instructional knowledge" stuff) and, perhaps more important, recognize the signs of an impending one and recover from one that a student may unintentionally cause.

Of course, done right, you =will= "go through the motions describing exactly the maneuver" but when actually doing it.

If you're nervous, don't worry about it. My first spins were for my CFI. the bad part is the anticipation. after the first demonstrated one ("count what?!") they are really no big deal.

[MichaelCPS]

Originally Posted by RPJ

I am studying for CFI primary. Is it required that I must actually enter and recover from a spin in flight or can I just go through the motions describing exactly the maneuver without entering a spin?


Thanks,
Ryan

Ryan:

I highly recommend seeking out an aerobatics instructor who has a Citabria or Pitts (or something aerobatic) and getting your spin training this way.

Michael

[CTFlyer]

Originally Posted by MichaelCPS

Ryan:

I highly recommend seeking out an aerobatics instructor who has a Citabria or Pitts (or something aerobatic) and getting your spin training this way.

Michael

Yes to the above and wear an approved parachute during the training.

[nosehair]

Originally Posted by Rich

Yes to the above and wear an approved parachute during the training.

Has anyone (did you?) ever try to wear a parachute in a 152 ???

I tried it in an old 172. Do you think you could actually get the door open and get out after you have "broken up" ???

I don't think I could.

[calcapt]

Get comfortable with spins - period. Don't look at this from what is required. If you ever get into a low level spin you must instinctively know what do as you don't have a lot of time to think through the recovery procedures. One day I was determined to do spins until they got comfortable. I lost track at 30 spins in one flight. Quite dizzy for the rest of the day I might add.

[bdhill1979]

Originally Posted by RPJ

I am studying for CFI primary. Is it required that I must actually enter and recover from a spin in flight or can I just go through the motions describing exactly the maneuver without entering a spin?


Thanks,
Ryan

I just did mine a few weeks ago and it was a blast!! We took a Super Cub and spun the hell out of it. I was scared at first, because I had never been in a spin and didnt quite have the confidence that what I have been taught would actually recover the aircraft, but after the first one it was awesome.

[MidlifeFlyer]

Originally Posted by calcapt

Get comfortable with spins - period. Don't look at this from what is required. If you ever get into a low level spin you must instinctively know what do

Is that before of after the initial surprise period? You've already been flying badly enough or distracted enough to put yourself into a low-level spin. I'd guess the surprise/reaction period is long enough for you to hit the ground before you can "instinctively react" to anything.

Never mind base to final cross-controlling. The typical takeoff spin accident was completely recoverable by simply lowering the nose to level at the point of engine failure (before even the stall, let alone the spin occurred) even though engine failures are practiced as nauseum.

Only an opinion, but I don't think the idea of recovery from a low-level unintentional spin is a realistic one.

[nosehair]

Originally Posted by MidlifeFlyer

Only an opinion, but I don't think the idea of recovery from a low-level unintentional spin is a realistic one.

Of course, every one has one - an opinion, that is.

But what would you have us do? Give up? Don't even try to train yourself into being able, if it is at all humanly possible, to recover at least into a landing attitude before ground impact? Is that the point of your comments about spin recovery? I don't know. I'm not sure of your purpose in your remarks, Mark.

At the end of the day, I am much more comfortable flying an airplane that is mastered by me, rather than the other way around. That is really my only real point in all training.

Getting really proficient at spin entry and recovery tends to teach you the process of not getting into the spin to begin with much better than just saying you won't stall or spin. Like doing 'recoveries from bad landings', you get better at doing good landings.

[MidlifeFlyer]

I accept the arguments of those who claim that spin training builds better pilots as valid ones (that doesn't mean I agree with them).

But I don't think there's much validity to the idea that spin training is somehow going to save you from the result of bad piloting and bad judgment.

[USMC-SGT]

I dont think it is to save you from the result of bad piloting and bad judgement....

it is to save you from your STUDENTS result of bad piloting and bad judgement.

Any CFI knows that students will do the CRAZIEST things..power on stall and you say "keep the airplane coordinated" or something along those lines and some will STOMP the rudder to the floor and have the airplane on its way to a spin and you as the instructor MUST not only be capable, but comfortable to apply immediate action in a calm and cool manner to correct the situation.

Invaluable

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by nosehair

But what would you have us do? Give up? Don't even try to train yourself into being able, if it is at all humanly possible, to recover at least into a landing attitude before ground impact?

That's a little bit like the story of the drunk looking for his keys under the street light, because the light is better there. So we teach oodles of stalls because we don't know what else to do?

Originally Posted by nosehair

Getting really proficient at spin entry and recovery tends to teach you the process of not getting into the spin to begin with much better than just saying you won't stall or spin.

And you still have no supporting evidence of that. I find it much more plausible that the time is better spent developing prociency at the tasks which might lead to stall spin accidents. A high degree of airspeed control in normal approaches, emergency procedures, go arounds, and takeoffs would effectively eliminate the stall spin problem, if you ignore the knuckleheads buzzing their friends' houses.

Originally Posted by nosehair

Like doing 'recoveries from bad landings', you get better at doing good landings.

I don't agree with this observation, so the analogy fails.

[MidlifeFlyer]

Originally Posted by USMC-SGT

I dont think it is to save you from the result of bad piloting and bad judgement....

it is to save you from your STUDENTS result of bad piloting and bad judgement.

Any CFI knows that students will do the CRAZIEST things..power on stall and you say "keep the airplane coordinated" or something along those lines and some will STOMP the rudder to the floor and have the airplane on its way to a spin and you as the instructor MUST not only be capable, but comfortable to apply immediate action in a calm and cool manner to correct the situation.

Invaluable

I agree. See earlier post. Your example? BTDT. Exactly.

[nosehair]

Originally Posted by tgrayson

I find it much more plausible that the time is better spent developing prociency at the tasks which might lead to stall spin accidents. A high degree of airspeed control in normal approaches, emergency procedures, go arounds, and takeoffs would effectively eliminate the stall spin problem,

I guess you are getting a 'tunnel-vision' view of my overall training objectives, because we are discussing stall/spin training.

Proficiency in stalls and spins are a normal progression of the skills you mention. Learning the physical visual visceral motions of the aircraft about all it's capable axies, and developing a control touch and emotional response that leaves you the master of the airplane.

How can you be master if your afraid?

Talk to me. How do you develop complete control authority in a fledgling pilot who is learning these skills? Do you honestly believe that we can 'talk' about upset training, and that will be sufficient?

Do you honestly not see that 'bad landing practice' is benificial? Do you not teach how to go-around and how to add a little power to recover from a slight ballon? or making quick cross-control corrections for a 'simulated gust' ?

You can't just 'talk' about these things, no more than you can 'talk' a person through landing skills. They must be practiced.

[moxiepilot]

Having taught for a while now, I can say that being comfortable with spinning makes me a better instructor.

There comes a point in a students training when the student is practicing stalls and youve told them about coordination where you just say to yourself, "okay here we go..."

Also being so intimate with spin entry, i feel it allows me to be comfortable in letting a student make mistakes in the pattern. Here we are in a 172 at 50 kts on final uncoordinated.... is it pushing the envelope of safety? Yes. That is why my focus and attention is preventing anything from happening.

But if I wasnt there to talk to the student about coming in low slow and uncoordinated - they'd probably be doing it when i wasn't there. I'll take them up to 2500' and put the airplane in the same condition. Then I will show them that something has caused me to pull rearward on the yoke and the result.

They tend not to come in low, slow and uncoordinated again.

If I wasn't comfortable with the characteristics of a spin I wouldn't have the ability to be a good teacher because i would be guarding the controls way too much.

$.02

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by nosehair

because we are discussing stall/spin training.

I thought we were discussing stall/spin training in order to produce safer pilots?

<<Proficiency in stalls and spins are a normal progression of the skills you mention.>>

That's under dispute. I suspect you could train a skillful pilot who had never stalled an airplane. Safe? Arguable. Knowing what a stall is does motivate the pilot to respect airspeeds.

<<Learning the physical visual visceral motions of the aircraft about all it's capable axies, and developing a control touch and emotional response that leaves you the master of the airplane.>>

"Master of the airplane" is relative. No one is ever a complete master. Stall/spin training increases proficiency in a very artificial flight regime. There is no data to suggest that there is any transfer of this learning to other flight regimes.

<<How can you be master if your afraid?>>

You will not eliminate fear for many pilots during PPL training; you might make some of them more afraid.

<<Talk to me. How do you develop complete control authority in a fledgling pilot who is learning these skills? >>

You never develop "complete control authority" in any pilot of any level. All you can do is increase authority.

<<Do you honestly believe that we can 'talk' about upset training, and that will be sufficient?>>

Of course not, but there are diminishing returns. The quick and superficial answer to stall/spin accidents is "more spin training." I'm skeptical that works.

<<Do you honestly not see that 'bad landing practice' is benificial? >>

Didn't say that. Your argument was that landings improve due to bad landings. I see landings improving after the student does something correctly. Bad landing practice improves the ability to fix bad landings. That's a different skill from making good landings.

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by moxiepilot

They tend not to come in low, slow and uncoordinated again.

I think it's more effective to avoid frightening students into doing what I ask. Giving them a behavior to strive for rather than a behavior to avoid seems better pedagogically. Proper approach paths and airspeeds can be taught simply as good airmanship.

I can't draw direct cause/effect relationship, but many pilots start packing on airspeed once they get out of training. They're so afraid of stalling that they add a margin on top of the margin already built into published airspeeds. I've also seen pilots not touch the rudder in the pattern because they're afraid of cross-controlled stalls. As the Flight Instructor Handbook says, fear narrows the perceptual field. All they see is the thing which frightens them.

[MidlifeFlyer]

Originally Posted by moxiepilot

Having taught for a while now, I can say that being comfortable with spinning makes me a better instructor.

There comes a point in a students training when the student is practicing stalls and youve told them about coordination where you just say to yourself, "okay here we go..."

I agree with you. I think one of the best coordination/stall/spin awareness lessons a student of mine has had was when I saw a spin scenario developing during a power-on stall and decided not to correct it (The right-foot mash USMC-SGT referred to above). I recovered early from the resulting spin and a substantial part of the rest of the session was spent with him holding the nose-high stall attitude going in and out of the stall with small AoA changes and dancing on the rudder pedals to maintain coordination throughout.

Without my own CFI spin training, I would not have let it go as far as it did.

[moxiepilot]

Originally Posted by tgrayson

I think it's more effective to avoid frightening students into doing what I ask. Giving them a behavior to strive for rather than a behavior to avoid seems better pedagogically. Proper approach paths and airspeeds can be taught simply as good airmanship.

I can't draw direct cause/effect relationship, but many pilots start packing on airspeed once they get out of training. They're so afraid of stalling that they add a margin on top of the margin already built into published airspeeds. I've also seen pilots not touch the rudder in the pattern because they're afraid of cross-controlled stalls. As the Flight Instructor Handbook says, fear narrows the perceptual field. All they see is the thing which frightens them.

I agree far is not a productive tool. However, nowhere in the post did I say that I put the student in a demo in a spin. I show them that it can lead to a spin. The demonstration is enough to make an impact without having them become fearful.

And in the case of practicing stalling, I will let the a/c nose over 30-90 degrees into the incipient stage. But, never have I let a student develop a full blown spin without first asking permission.

I respect your input, but nowhere did I post that I instill fear in a student as a method to teach.

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by moxiepilot

nowhere did I post that I instill fear in a student as a method to teach.

What exactly does this lesson teach, if not fear? It says "you will die if you are low, slow and uncoordinated on final."