Thread: Impromptu flight ended in spin

Originally Posted by superquag

Let me guess..... with all that surface area on top of the tail... it's all going to shake rattle & roll ?

It would twist and turn like Elvis. There was an AD to strengthen the tail after a couple were lost.
Spin training was NOT one of my favurite lessons to deliver in the PA38...

Originally Posted by Hugh Jars

It would twist and turn like Elvis. There was an AD to strengthen the tail after a couple were lost.
Spin training was NOT one of my favurite lessons to deliver in the PA38...

I trained on Tomahawks also, amongst a couple of others. Strangely enough I have a photo of it somewhere taxing past my helicopter.
This particular aircraft was owned by the CFI and he would not allow spins past the incipient stage.

Originally Posted by superquag

Let me guess..... with all that surface area on top of the tail... it's all going to shake rattle & roll ?

Actually in accident records the tail did not statistically show to be an issue. In general flying the Tomahawk was safer than a Cessna 150/2 but where accidents were the cause of spins and stalls it was many times "unsafe" than the Cessna - this is because subject to height in a Cessna if you find yourself in a spin - just taking your hands and feet off the controls it recovers itself (the fail safe position) but the Tomahawk being designed to be a spinable trainer it was deigned not to self recover - so required input from the pilot to recover - as a result their crash rate when doing this was much worse than equivalent Cessnas. I suspect that this was probably not in spin training but in normal solo work where trainees got themselves in stall situations and were do rough with the controls or were using ailerons to control and went into a spin - in a Cessna hands off and generally ok.

Garry

Originally Posted by Hugh Jars

It would twist and turn like Elvis. There was an AD to strengthen the tail after a couple were lost.
Spin training was NOT one of my favurite lessons to deliver in the PA38...

Wonder if the Robin 2160 has a 'flexible' rear end.... Had a peculiar experience during spin-recovery, as rudder went iin - stick very forcibly wanted to osscilate fully DOWN then UP. did a couple of cycles before I got both hands on it.... Instructor had never seen that before. Still dunno, and stall-turns straight after went ok, so nothing bent or broken !

- Plane still flying...

(actually, had a fun-flight in both that school's Robins... and neither has since suffered an "Unscheduled Dis-assembley", )

Edit: "... but in normal solo work where trainees got themselves in stall situations and were too rough with the controls or were using ailerons to control and went into a spin..."

Or ego / inexperience getting the better of them... as I was very much cogniszant of probably tripping me up sooner rather than later; - Hence the extra "training" with aeros, get used to seeing how thin the line betwixt Complacent Pilot and 'Oh faecal matter' pilot. Sobering.

Originally Posted by 101RRS

Cessna - this is because subject to height in a Cessna if you find yourself in a spin - just taking your hands and feet off the controls it recovers itself (the fail safe position) but the Tomahawk being designed to be a spinable trainer it was deigned not to self recover - so required input from the pilot to recover - as a result their crash rate when doing this was much worse than equivalent Cessnas. I suspect that this was probably not in spin training but in normal solo work where trainees got themselves in stall situations and were do rough with the controls or were using ailerons to control and went into a spin - in a Cessna hands off and generally ok.

Garry

Dead right mate, as a 17yo trainee pilot, went up solo to practice stalls a week after having learnt them with an instructor. Luckily I was 3000ft above the sea...because twice I mucked up the recovery and found myself in a spin(cessna 152). Somehow I worked out how to recover, or maybe the 152 did it for me, before I met my watery end. I had a bit of an aversion to wing-drop stalls after that though!

Originally Posted by 101RRS

Actually in accident records the tail did not statistically show to be an issue. In general flying the Tomahawk was safer than a Cessna 150/2 but where accidents were the cause of spins and stalls it was many times "unsafe" than the Cessna - this is because subject to height in a Cessna if you find yourself in a spin - just taking your hands and feet off the controls it recovers itself (the fail safe position) but the Tomahawk being designed to be a spinable trainer it was deigned not to self recover - so required input from the pilot to recover - as a result their crash rate when doing this was much worse than equivalent Cessnas. I suspect that this was probably not in spin training but in normal solo work where trainees got themselves in stall situations and were do rough with the controls or were using ailerons to control and went into a spin - in a Cessna hands off and generally ok.

Garry

Hi Garry,
The Tomahawk did actually self-recover - it just took a few more rotations. That was the first thing the CFI taught me in instructor school. The demonstration was done from 6000' in the Sydney training area. From memory, it took over 1500' before it transitioned to a spiral dive. The recovery from that would see about a total of 2-3000' altitude loss from start to finish of the whole manoeuvre (depending on technique).

I can't compare it to the C150/152, as I have very little experience on them, and never got to spin one.

John R.

Originally Posted by Hugh Jars

Hi Garry,
The Tomahawk did actually self-recover - it just took a few more rotations.

Ok didn't know that - was that before or after they changed the wing in the the early 80s because too many were crashing in spin practice.

Didn't mind doing aerobatics (not in a P38) but did not like doing spins so did not do them just for the fun of it.

I started in Victas, but the only aircraft I have actually spun (as far as I recall) are those, the Auster J-5F, Decathalon, and DH-82A. I may have spun the Beech-23, and possibly C-150, but I don't remember for sure.