---------------------------------------------------------- Pietenpol-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 07/15/05: 12 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 05:56 AM - Re: engines... (Robert Gow) 2. 06:04 AM - Re: anydoy spin it? (Robert Gow) 3. 06:08 AM - Re: engines... (Christian Bobka) 4. 07:25 AM - Brodhead. (Robert Gow) 5. 07:57 AM - Re: Brodhead Sustinence (Barry Davis) 6. 08:25 AM - Re: Brodhead Sustinence (Jim Markle) 7. 08:40 AM - Re: Brodhead. (Jeff Boatright) 8. 08:57 AM - Spin testing & training (M&M Stanley) 9. 09:40 AM - Re: Brodhead. (Dick Navratil) 10. 10:35 AM - Re: Brodhead. (Robert Gow) 11. 12:10 PM - Re: Spin testing & training (Galen Hutcheson) 12. 03:56 PM - Re: Brodhead. (Christian Bobka) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 05:56:05 AM PST US From: "Robert Gow" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: engines... --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Robert Gow" The story goes that J2 Cub salesmen would pull of one spark plug wire and do a circuit. They'd tell the customer to ask the Aeronca (C3) salesman to do the same. ;-). The truth is one sticking valve on a 65 can bring you down. It did on my Chief. It all started when I cleaned the plugs and didn't properly tighten one plug. In flight the intake valve on that cylinder started to carbon up and stopped closing properly. That caused a lot of blow back into the induction system and a loss of power. Full throttle was the worse case - no restriction to the blow-back. Idle throttle stopped the blow back but wasn't too helpful in keeping aloft. About mid throttle was where I found max power - good enough for about -200 fpm. It allowed me to pick a field close to a main road for hitchhiking. Winds were about 20k that day so the landing was short. Bob -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Christian Bobka Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: engines... --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" Dick, Just think of what a good day you would have if one jug on your A-65 stuck a valve or swallowed one. Just think how far you could fly. Quite a long way.... No just think what a better day you would have if you lost one jug on a two banger....You are going down now.... Chris Braumeister und Inspektor der Flitzer und Flitzermotoren ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dick Navratil" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: engines... > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Dick Navratil" > > I'm not aware of a BMW installation. I did some checking into using a > variety of 4 cyl motorcycle engines a few years ago. I main issue always > came back to them being too light and turning too fast. Between the issues > of extending the mount way out and engineering a reduction drive, I settled > on an A-65. > Now however there is a company called Hog Air that has a package with a > Harley Davidson engine. Engine, mount and reduction drive goes for about > $11k. With all accessories that should weigh in about right. > Dick N. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Stephen!" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 11:21 PM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: engines... > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Stephen!" > > > > > > > > Has anyone tried putting a BMW motorcycle boxer engine in one of these > > machines? > > > > -- > > IBA# 11465 > > http://imagesdesavions.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:04:20 AM PST US From: "Robert Gow" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: anydoy spin it? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Robert Gow" Years ago when I started aerobatic training, of which I did little, My instructor insisted in starting with spin entries. Being a new private pilot I knew everything about spins. We had done them in our training. Well guess what; I didn't know squat. He showed me the typical low level spin entries that kill people, steep turn, too slow cross controlled. Who knew a 150 would flip over on it's back to enter a spin (top rudder to keep the nose up) or sneak in to a spin on the inside (bottom rudder to hurry the turn). Relevant spin training is important. Bob -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Galen Hutcheson Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: anydoy spin it? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Galen Hutcheson Well, I guess I can add my two cents. Spins are a fact of life in aviation. Fear of spins prevents pilots from becoming proficient in executing spins safely and refexley. At low altitudes, where most fatal spins occur, reflex recovery is about all that can save you if you enter an incipient spin. This has happened to me and I have over ten thousand flying hours with over 1000 of those hours in acro. ANYONE can get into a spin accidently, but not every pilot can recover from a spin safely and in a timely fashion. The only way to learn spins is through an experienced pilot or instructor and then practice them until you can do them without having to think about them. I disagree that only certificated aircraft are safe to spin. I have spun more experimentals than I have certified aircraft. As a general rule, and depending on the wing airfoil, experimentals stall break quicker and therefore are easier to spin than certified aircraft. Each airplane can have enough different variables, even certified aircraft, that the spin characteristics may change some. However, almost all aircraft can spin, and therefor those aircraft can recover from spins (if the CG isn't too far toward the tail to prevent it). No Pilot should ever fly an aircraft knowing it has a significient reward CG, to me that is a no-brainer. To do so is just asking for trouble. In spite of the fact that no two Pietenpols are exactly the same, that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be spun. But they should only be spin tested by a pilot experienced in spins. He then could teach the more in-experienced pilot how to do spins safely in his personal plane. A pilot who is afraid of spins needs to do something to get proficiency. I don't care what the FAA says about this matter, spins should be an intergal part of all flight training. That is my two cents, so take it for what it is worth. Dicussion is a healthy thing, but when it comes to flying safely, there is no substitute for experience. Doc H. Do No Archive --- Mark wrote: > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Mark > > > Jim Ash wrote: > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Jim Ash > > There are really two questions here; what are the > plane's spin > > characteristics, and do you know how to do it? > > > > As for me, I would rather know how to spin under > planned > > circumstances, than find out under unplanned > circumstances. The > > knowledge of having done spins (and recoveries) > has saved my bacon at > > least once (in a certificated airplane). It all > happened so fast there > > wasn't much time to even think about it. > > > > As for the plane, I personally am not getting in > any plane if I'm not > > comfortable I can get out of it in a manner I > prefer. > > > > > > Jim Ash > > > Well Jim I would respectivefully disagree. First is > spinning under > planned circumstances. With an experimental > airplanes there is no such > thing. An 1/8 of an inch somewhere may totally > change the spin > characteristics. A certificated airplane is built > and tested to be both > predictable and consistent. One J3 loaded the same > as the next will > have simular spins. That does not apply with a Piet > or any other > airplane. Each is different. The thing that would > bother me about > spinning a Piet is that most of them are flown so > near the rearward CG > point. That means it is far more likely to flatten > out as one person > has already pointed out. > > Rarely will anyone get into a spin at an altitude > that is high enough > for a reasonable chance of recovery in an unplanned > situation. The > usual place is the base to final turn and one thing > is for sure. Anyone > sharp enough to recover from an accidental spin, > especially at low > altitude, is easily sharp enough to prevent it from > happening in the > first place. > > > browse > Subscriptions page, > FAQ, > > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:08:13 AM PST US d="scan'208"; a="1294170773:sNHT25336858" From: "Christian Bobka" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: engines... --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" Bob, I have been there too. Chris Braumeister und Inspektor der Flitzer und Flitzermotoren ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Gow" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: engines... > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Robert Gow" > > The story goes that J2 Cub salesmen would pull of one spark plug wire and do > a circuit. They'd tell the customer to ask the Aeronca (C3) salesman to do > the same. ;-). The truth is one sticking valve on a 65 can bring you down. > It did on my Chief. It all started when I cleaned the plugs and didn't > properly tighten one plug. In flight the intake valve on that cylinder > started to carbon up and stopped closing properly. That caused a lot of > blow back into the induction system and a loss of power. Full throttle was > the worse case - no restriction to the blow-back. Idle throttle stopped the > blow back but wasn't too helpful in keeping aloft. About mid throttle was > where I found max power - good enough for about -200 fpm. It allowed me to > pick a field close to a main road for hitchhiking. Winds were about 20k > that day so the landing was short. > > Bob > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Christian > Bobka > Sent: July 14, 2005 6:40 PM > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: engines... > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" > > Dick, > > Just think of what a good day you would have if one jug on your A-65 stuck a > valve or swallowed one. Just think how far you could fly. Quite a long > way.... > > No just think what a better day you would have if you lost one jug on a two > banger....You are going down now.... > > Chris > > Braumeister und Inspektor der Flitzer und Flitzermotoren > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dick Navratil" > To: > Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 11:34 AM > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: engines... > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Dick Navratil" > > > > > I'm not aware of a BMW installation. I did some checking into using a > > variety of 4 cyl motorcycle engines a few years ago. I main issue always > > came back to them being too light and turning too fast. Between the > issues > > of extending the mount way out and engineering a reduction drive, I > settled > > on an A-65. > > Now however there is a company called Hog Air that has a package with a > > Harley Davidson engine. Engine, mount and reduction drive goes for about > > $11k. With all accessories that should weigh in about right. > > Dick N. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Stephen!" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 11:21 PM > > Subject: Pietenpol-List: engines... > > > > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Stephen!" > > > > > > > > > > > > Has anyone tried putting a BMW motorcycle boxer engine in one of these > > > machines? > > > > > > -- > > > IBA# 11465 > > > http://imagesdesavions.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:25:17 AM PST US From: "Robert Gow" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead. I was thinking of going commercial to the nearest major airport. Would Chicago be the best option? Bob ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:57:50 AM PST US d="scan'208"; a="1133499805:sNHT51743914" From: "Barry Davis" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Sustinence --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Barry Davis" Larry, You can always bum a sandwich off the Big Piet Builders, We are bringing home grown tomatoes. Barry Davis ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Nelson" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Sustinence > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Larry Nelson > > Sounds good but we will be "afoot". > > --- Dennis Engelkenjohn wrote: > >> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Dennis >> Engelkenjohn" >> >> There is a pretty good coffee/sandwich shop in >> downtown Brodhead, just past >> the square. >> Dennis in St.Louis...who will be wearing a tie dyed >> shirt. It is too late to >> get my motto printed on a shirt: " Sanity is highly >> overrated!" >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Larry Nelson" >> To: >> Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 5:21 PM >> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Sustinence >> >> >> > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Larry Nelson >> >> > >> > >> > >> > Last year, my buds and me starved whilst many were >> > feasting. Why? Because we neglected to buy our >> meal >> > tickets. So, this year, we don't want that to >> happen. >> > As I recall, the local chapter serves meals all >> day >> > with one big feast. Yes? >> > >> > I will be flying my C-195 but my heart will be >> with >> > N444MH, Howard Henderson's old plane which I own, >> but >> > have yet to fly, although I have completed the >> > relocation of the wing 3" aft. My name is also >> Larry >> > and I always have "Larry" written on MY forehead, >> so >> > please don't mistake me for the better looking >> Larry >> > who may also have "Larry" written on HIS forehead. >> > >> > We will be there Friday afternoon. Save some food. >> > Then it is to OSH Sunday morning. >> > >> > >> > >> > Larry Nelson >> > Springfield, MO >> > Beechcraft Bonanza V-35B N2980A >> > Pietenpol Air Camper N444MH >> > 1963 GMC 4106-1618 >> > SV/ Spirit of America >> > ARS WB0JOT >> > >> > __________________________________________________ >> protection around >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> browse >> Subscriptions page, >> FAQ, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > Larry Nelson > Springfield, MO > Beechcraft Bonanza V-35B N2980A > Pietenpol Air Camper N444MH > 1963 GMC 4106-1618 > SV/ Spirit of America > ARS WB0JOT > > __________________________________________________ > > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 08:25:02 AM PST US From: Jim Markle Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Sustinence --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Jim Markle I know someone who's driving up to Brodhead who will gladly give up his truck keys to anyone willing to give up an airplane ride...... Life's too short to take things like cars and such too seriously, so I don't. Please feel free to come get the keys if you need them. I plan on being there from late afternoon Thursday until Sunday morning..... Actually, I'm VERY ready to go right now..... jm ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Nelson" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Sustinence > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Larry Nelson > > Sounds good but we will be "afoot". > > --- Dennis Engelkenjohn wrote: > >> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Dennis >> Engelkenjohn" >> >> There is a pretty good coffee/sandwich shop in >> downtown Brodhead, just past >> the square. >> Dennis in St.Louis...who will be wearing a tie dyed >> shirt. It is too late to >> get my motto printed on a shirt: " Sanity is highly >> overrated!" >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Larry Nelson" >> To: >> Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 5:21 PM >> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Sustinence >> >> >> > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Larry Nelson >> >> > >> > >> > >> > Last year, my buds and me starved whilst many were >> > feasting. Why? Because we neglected to buy our >> meal >> > tickets. So, this year, we don't want that to >> happen. >> > As I recall, the local chapter serves meals all >> day >> > with one big feast. Yes? >> > >> > I will be flying my C-195 but my heart will be >> with >> > N444MH, Howard Henderson's old plane which I own, >> but >> > have yet to fly, although I have completed the >> > relocation of the wing 3" aft. My name is also >> Larry >> > and I always have "Larry" written on MY forehead, >> so >> > please don't mistake me for the better looking >> Larry >> > who may also have "Larry" written on HIS forehead. >> > >> > We will be there Friday afternoon. Save some food. >> > Then it is to OSH Sunday morning. >> > >> > >> > >> > Larry Nelson >> > Springfield, MO >> > Beechcraft Bonanza V-35B N2980A >> > Pietenpol Air Camper N444MH >> > 1963 GMC 4106-1618 >> > SV/ Spirit of America >> > ARS WB0JOT >> > >> > __________________________________________________ >> protection around >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> browse >> Subscriptions page, >> FAQ, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > Larry Nelson > Springfield, MO > Beechcraft Bonanza V-35B N2980A > Pietenpol Air Camper N444MH > 1963 GMC 4106-1618 > SV/ Spirit of America > ARS WB0JOT > > __________________________________________________ > > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 08:40:26 AM PST US From: Jeff Boatright Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead. I prefer Milwaukee. It's a little closer and it has a small museum. At 10:21 AM -0400 7/15/05, Robert Gow wrote: >I was thinking of going commercial to the nearest major airport. >Would Chicago be the best option? > >Bob -- Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD Assistant Professor, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, GA, USA Senior Editor, Molecular Vision, http://www.molvis.org/molvis mailto:jboatri@emory.edu ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:57:37 AM PST US From: "M&M Stanley" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Spin testing & training Hi Pieters, Just reading everyone's comments regarding spinning. I have to say that I agree with Doc & Jim Ash. My profession is performing major repairs to damaged sailplanes and subsequent test flying through the aircrafts normal flight envelope. I have also worked as a full time,professional gliding instructor in Australia and taught both basic flight and aerobatics (gliders). I taught allot of people how to both get into and out of spins. I whole heartedly agree that pilots should not attempt spins without first doing formal training with a qualified instructor who is comfortable with spin training. (I know of instructors who themselves are not comfortable spinning). I feel that studying and fully understanding the theory of exactly what is happening to the aircraft prior to, during the incipient phase, during the fully developed spin and finally how to apply the correct recovery technique is vitally important to successful spin training. Spins should not be feared, they are just the result of a series of actions to which the aircraft responds. Once understood and practiced, they are both a fun and safe maneuver..........if the aircraft is loaded ( Cof G within it's limit's) and the pilot is fully trained to handle the maneuver. I agree that even in certified aircraft, small variations can turn an aircraft with normally docile spin characteristics into one that wants to do nasty things. An example is a training sailplane which was normally excellent for spin training had 3lb wing tip skids attached to each tip. With the 3lb skids sitting on the end of 18meter long wings, the rotational forces increased such that the aircraft used approximately 4000ft to recover from a fully developed test spin. ( the C/G was well within it's limits). The skids were removed (ie; back to the factory configuration ) and the test was performed by the same pilot/loading conditions on the same day and the aircraft was immediately back to it's normal 1/2 rotation to stop the spin then recover from the resultant dive. I feel that the spin testing of a new aircraft for the first time should be approached very slowly and carefully. Obviously, a pilot with ample experience in spinning, wearing a chute, and with lot's of altitude should perform the testing. The following would be my version of testing, anyone is welcome to disagree and it is not meant to overide proper training etc. First, basic straight ahead stalls should be fully explored in varying C/G positions.(all with the limit's of course) Secondly, if basic stall testing is successful with no nasty surprises, then the 'Incipient phase' (ie; stall with wing drop to a max of 1/2 a rotation & recovery) could be explored, once again with varying C/G positions. (still the limit's of course!!) Lastly, and only after the aircraft has proven itself safe in the last two phases, should the full spin be allowed to develop. I would perhaps try one turn then recover, and if successful, climb and try one turn in the opposite direction, recover and so on. The number of turns could be gradually increased to the number desired, testing in both directions...............step by step. An aircraft designer/engineer friend of mine in Australia, said that the fully developed spin can take anything up to 17 turns (yep, 17 turns!!) to 'stabilize' into a state of equilibrium, where the relevant forces involved are balanced. I have no idea if this is correct or not but I have never performed a 17 turn spin to find out ! I fully agree that ANYONE can get into an unintentional spin, and when it happens in the pattern at low altitude, especially on the final turn, you need to get the recovery right the first time and do it with a reflexed action..........if not, it may very well be the final turn. If testing the spin characteristics of a new aircraft, understanding exactly what is happening may just get you out of a bind if things don't quite go smoothly. In gliding in Australia, spin training is not an option prior to solo flight, it is mandatory. However, during spin training, we emphasize the "understanding and recognition" of the events that occur PRIOR to the actual spin occurring. By becoming aware of the symptoms prior to the actual event, pilots are able to correct the situation before it develops into a potentially dangerous situation. This was only going to be a short note stating my agreence with Doc & Jim, I apologize for dragging it out but I love safety in flight. My ideas above should not be used as a substitute for actual hands on experience with a suitable qualified instructor, So, go and do the training, and enjoy your flying even more comfortable in the knowledge that you have a good chance to save your bacon should the little thing called a spin occur to you sometime!! Safe flying to all. Regards Mark S Japan...........still hot & sweaty! ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:40:10 AM PST US From: "Dick Navratil" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead. Chicago is good if you are coming a long way. Milwakee is also a good major airport. Both of them are roughly 150 mi to Broadhead. Madison is only 50 mi away but the wait for connecting flights can eat up that time. I just drove thru Madison last week, caution on construction on 90/94, there are some big backups at times. From Milwakee I-43 is shorter and better. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Gow To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 9:21 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead. I was thinking of going commercial to the nearest major airport. Would Chicago be the best option? Bob ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 10:35:17 AM PST US From: "Robert Gow" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead. I'm out of Toronto - nearest at my end. Of course there is always the Cherokee but Customs can get nasty these days since 9/11. Bob -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dick Navratil Sent: July 15, 2005 12:37 PM To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead. Chicago is good if you are coming a long way. Milwakee is also a good major airport. Both of them are roughly 150 mi to Broadhead. Madison is only 50 mi away but the wait for connecting flights can eat up that time. I just drove thru Madison last week, caution on construction on 90/94, there are some big backups at times. From Milwakee I-43 is shorter and better. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Gow To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 9:21 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead. I was thinking of going commercial to the nearest major airport. Would Chicago be the best option? Bob ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 12:10:47 PM PST US s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=KbmrW03RrFtrV+4RI81K1f3S0Cthlgn+QikPLuyYwEGY+gSApEJ4Ng1WAxH4kFELVlPuCaN7BJYJeSXSOloPrzzDtxcwyjnK+coOI8f6EjUarR4DuVbWEJuGsnh7kFslADf8JcKOUxumHCNPi9Kyiy6230WjsxKuMcPHsbBnIrM= ; From: Galen Hutcheson Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spin testing & training --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Galen Hutcheson Mark, very well said. I agree with everything you wrote and I certainly can't improve on your statements. My first Pitts, an S1-C model, normally had great spin characteristis--clean break, fully developed withng 3-4 rotations and quick to recover, usually within one rotation. It did not have a smoke system and in my "wisdom" I decided to use military smoke canisters attached to a bracket bolted on the tail spring with cables running into the cockpit to displace the locking pins on the canisters. The system worked fine with two exceptions. First fire rained from heaven setting several small grass fires-thank goodness for the local fire dept and the fact I was out in a non-populated area. And secondly, the bracket with the canisters attached really changed the aerodynamics of the tail section. After the canisters burned out (which took less than a minute) I continued flying acro of which spins were included. I did a simple power-off, upright spin and within two rotations the spin went flat!!! This had never happened before and normal recovery imputs had no effect on the spinning plane. I was at or above 1500' agl, so I knew I was in trouble. As I recall, and everything happened so quickly, I added power and banked into the direction of the spin to recover from this spin. I am not absolutely certain, but this is the best I can recall. All this illustrates that a normally good spinning airplane can be made dangerous by changing its configuration. Needless to say that was the last time I tested that device. I applaude Austrailia for their insight in requiring spin training to get a pilot's lic. This country used to require spins, but my understranding is that someone thought more people would take flying lessons if they didn't have to do the "deadly spins." I am sure there are other reasons also. This was a huge mistake on the part of the FAA. All kinds of spins should be learned and practiced to include both upright and inverted spins, spins with full power as well as the power-off variety. When I taught spins, I would set real life scenerios to show pilots how even simple flight maneuvers can go wrong and spins occur. My final test to the student would be to do a 1/2 snap roll into an inverted spin and then have the student recover. This training built a great deal of confidence in the pilots and hopefully made them safer flyers. Happy landings...always, Doc H. Do Not Archive --- M&M Stanley wrote: > Hi Pieters, > > Just reading everyone's comments regarding spinning. > I have to say that I > agree with Doc & Jim Ash. > My profession is performing major repairs to damaged > sailplanes and > subsequent test flying through the aircrafts normal > flight envelope. > I have also worked as a full time,professional > gliding instructor in > Australia and taught both basic flight and > aerobatics (gliders). > I taught allot of people how to both get into and > out of spins. > I whole heartedly agree that pilots should not > attempt spins without first > doing formal training with a qualified instructor > who is comfortable with > spin training. (I know of instructors who themselves > are not comfortable > spinning). > I feel that studying and fully understanding the > theory of exactly what is > happening to the aircraft prior to, during the > incipient phase, during the > fully developed spin and finally how to apply the > correct recovery technique > is vitally important to successful spin training. > Spins should not be feared, they are just the result > of a series of actions > to which the aircraft responds. Once understood and > practiced, they are both > a fun and safe maneuver..........if the aircraft is > loaded ( Cof G within > it's limit's) and the pilot is fully trained to > handle the maneuver. > > I agree that even in certified aircraft, small > variations can turn an > aircraft with normally docile spin characteristics > into one that wants to > do nasty things. An example is a training sailplane > which was normally > excellent for spin training had 3lb wing tip skids > attached to each tip. > With the 3lb skids sitting on the end of 18meter > long wings, the rotational > forces increased such that the aircraft used > approximately 4000ft to recover > from a fully developed test spin. ( the C/G was well > within it's limits). > The skids were removed (ie; back to the factory > configuration ) and the test > was performed by the same pilot/loading conditions > on the same day and the > aircraft was immediately back to it's normal 1/2 > rotation to stop the spin > then recover from the resultant dive. > > I feel that the spin testing of a new aircraft for > the first time should be > approached very slowly and carefully. Obviously, a > pilot with ample > experience in spinning, wearing a chute, and with > lot's of altitude should > perform the testing. > The following would be my version of testing, anyone > is welcome to disagree > and it is not meant to overide proper training etc. > > First, basic straight ahead stalls should be fully > explored in varying C/G > positions.(all with the limit's of course) > Secondly, if basic stall testing is successful with > no nasty surprises, then > the 'Incipient phase' (ie; stall with wing drop to a > max of 1/2 a rotation & > recovery) could be explored, once again with varying > C/G positions. (still > the limit's of course!!) > Lastly, and only after the aircraft has proven > itself safe in the last two > phases, should the full spin be allowed to develop. > I would perhaps try one turn then recover, and if > successful, climb and try > one turn in the opposite direction, recover and so > on. > The number of turns could be gradually increased to > the number desired, > testing in both directions...............step by > step. > > An aircraft designer/engineer friend of mine in > Australia, said that the > fully developed spin can take anything up to 17 > turns (yep, 17 turns!!) to > 'stabilize' into a state of equilibrium, where the > relevant forces involved > are balanced. > I have no idea if this is correct or not but I have > never performed a 17 > turn spin to find out ! > > I fully agree that ANYONE can get into an > unintentional spin, and when it > happens in the pattern at low altitude, especially > on the final turn, you > need to get the recovery right the first time and do > it with a reflexed > action..........if not, it may very well be the > final turn. > If testing the spin characteristics of a new > aircraft, understanding exactly > what is happening may just get you out of a bind if > things don't quite go > smoothly. > > In gliding in Australia, spin training is not an > option prior to solo > flight, it is mandatory. However, during spin > training, we emphasize the > "understanding and recognition" of the events that > occur PRIOR to the actual > spin occurring. By becoming aware of the symptoms > prior to the actual event, > pilots are able to correct the situation before it > develops into a > potentially dangerous situation. > > This was only going to be a short note stating my > agreence with Doc & Jim, I > apologize for dragging it out but I love safety in > flight. My ideas above > should not be used as a substitute for actual hands > on experience with a > suitable qualified instructor, So, go and do the > training, and enjoy your > flying even more comfortable in the knowledge that > you have a good chance to > save your bacon should the little thing called a > spin occur to you > sometime!! > > Safe flying to all. > > Regards > Mark S > Japan...........still hot & sweaty! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 03:56:09 PM PST US d="scan'208,217"; a="1129316996:sNHT34313092" From: "Christian Bobka" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead. Chicago or Madison. I used to go into madison (MSN) but rental cars can be a problem there due to Oshkosh. Same with Milwaukee (MKE). ORD and MDW have tons of rental cars but it is more of a drive with some tolls too. Chris Braumeister und Inspektor der Flitzer und Flitzermotoren ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Gow To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 9:21 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead. I was thinking of going commercial to the nearest major airport. Would Chicago be the best option? Bob