Hey everybody! I was just curious, in real flight training, when do you go over spins?
Thanks!

Mobius wrote on Dec 27^th, 2009 at 10:57pm:


That was something I never agreed with.  I think everyone at some point should conduct actual training on spins, although it helps to talk it through first, and have a competent instructor.  One instructor that tried to do spin training with me was quite frankly scared of them.  After doing one, he decided that was good enough and never did them again.  I believe the reason the FAA doesn't require the actual training is because if done improperly can cause crashed (which it has), and not all training aircraft are spin qualified.  I imagine those learning in Cirrus aircraft will never do actual spin training.

I agree that doing an actual spin should be required.  I had talked about spins with my instructor and I knew what I had to do to recover, but when I actually did my first spin, everything essentially went out the window and it was a real eye opener to try to remember everything while spinning.

I did my spin training in a Cessna 152 Aerobat, which spins rather easily, but go up to the 172 and it's very difficult to get it to spin much more than a half turn.

In 1962 stall & spin recovery was a mandatory part of the PPL syllabus before being allowed solo. I'm not sure when this was changed but I always thought it was a mistake.

A lot of spinning is really hard on gyro instruments.  The spin they used to teach - straight up, step on the rudder was not the one you'll encounter during your everyday flight.  Most pilots notice an increasing angle of attack, wings level, but it's the turn that gets them.  Only aerobatic training can provide a look at the snap-like over the top disorientation of this type of spin.

olderndirt wrote on Dec 29^th, 2009 at 10:06am:


Good points. And there's the fact that in the US, spins were taken out of the PP requirements because of spin accidents... and considering that most non-training stall/spin accidents occur at altitudes too low for recovery (they usually don't even have time to develop a proper spin), "recognition and recovery" has been proven to work well enough, provided the pilot understands what's going on and pays attention when maneuvering.

I agree that at least one aerobatic lesson should be encouraged, but not required. I didn't get to do any spins during my acro lesson (too hazy, in the CFI's opinion, for vertical-line stuff), but the other upset-recovery exercises were useful.
I managed to talk a previous instructor into demonstrating a spin in a 172 during a dual flight...did about 1/2 turn of a fully-developed upright spin. The most illuminating thing about that was how difficult it was to get a Skyhawk to spin. Took a lot of effort, which makes you wonder how anybody could let an airplane get away from them to such an extent.  I guess the bottom line is that no regulation can fix lassitude or plain stupidity.

Since most trainers are reluctant to spin, it seems sufficient to have the student practice stalls, particularly accelerated stalls, with some variation in how much rudder is applied, to show how critical it is to keep the ball centered (in addition, of course, to keeping the wing flying). And once a pilot is turned loose with a PP cert., stalls should continue to be practiced.

beaky wrote on Dec 29^th, 2009 at 11:37am:
I always liked to believe I practiced one each flight - power off, at touchdown  .