What Altitude do you believe this pilot was at to successfully get out of a spin. Looks like he lost quite a bit of altitude. Might have a shot if your starting at 10,000ft
This was not a good idea. When you watch the video, the spin starts to go flat in the first 1-2 turns. Twins have mass outboard, which creates a radius of gyration with rotation. This is different than the case with CLT aircraft. Think of a bolo being thrown at the ground while rotating. Of course, the engines are available to counteract the rotation, since they are both running. My greatest concern is that showing this may make some yahoos think they can go spin their twin. No. Same for "death spirals". Never encourage an attempt to fly a death spiral. They do exist, and are almost definite death warrants. I've been in one; don't go there! Frank Price did not approve of any spin over three rotations, IIRC. Take what Papa Tiger said on faith, since he had "been there, done that" and seen many others collect the fatal T-shirt. I did inverted flat spins with him, and I put great stock in his opinion.
@@jimk9290 check again. And then go read Darrol Stinton and read Sammy Mason. Pay attention to equations of motion. Note with majority of mass, it is just as happy to spin in roll puts nearly as much mass perpendicular too.
I used to rent Beech Duchess when I started to fly in California. They are very nimble with excellent control harmony. I thought about buying one but maintenance on those are expensive as Beech do not make them anymore and parts have become scarce. Plus, they are not exactly speed demons. They cruise around 160 KIAS at optimum altitudes of 6000 to 9000 feet. Now I fly Corporate jets for a living but I miss those days when I would just jump in the Duchess with my girlfriend and fly on MY SCHEDULE when I felt like it. I am going to have to buy a small airplane to get back to my aviation roots of my youth!
Anyone notice that the parachute 'cover' was the top of a Folger's Coffee can! LOL When I was learning to fly 40 some years ago, I did most of my training in a Cessna 150. Stalls and stalls to spin, and spin recovery were part of my training. Spins are NOT a big deal, if you know how to get out of one, and I truly believe that every pilot should learn how to get into a spin, and how to get out of it, as part of their basic training for a PPL.
I to learnt over 40 years ago to fly before going commercial and flying Boeings for an International Airline Company. Spins were a part of my tuition and did many spins. Amazing how quickly you lose height. Takes three times longer to climb back to safe altitude. Hated doing RH spins as the aircraft seemed to go spin three times faster, so pent my time doing LH spins, except when it came to PPL license renewal. Had to spin both ways . Ah those were the days. Now retired and spend as much time with my grandchildren.
Spins may not be a big deal in a single engine aircraft. Twins are a totally different animal. The greater inertia of the two engines makes recovery unlikely. And since Spins in twins usually occur in flight training at low altitude and air speed. Aircraft impact the ground before recovery can be made. The FAA required that engine out handling be taught at low altitude didn't help much.
The amount of spin related accidents has significantly dropped ever since the FAA removed spins as a required part of training during PPL though. Spin awareness should be taught before a student ever solos but I'm ganna disagree on the the actual manuever being required as a part of training during the PPL phase. If a private pilot can find a CFI willing to do it with 'em then I'm all for that. I do think spins should be required during commercial flight training rather than only being required for CFI training.
Pilots of light twins who might be familiar with spins and spin recovery in singles should be reminded of the plain fact that two heavy weights - the engines - on the wings will significantly effect the spin recovery characteristics of the twin.
@@tomarmstrong1281 I’d imagine that military test pilots have to be exposed to all eventualities in training. They might do developed spins in multi engined planes modified with anti-spin tail parachutes? If they do inverted spins why not spin wing engine twins.
It was brave to spin one, as T-Tails are known to be subject to aerodynamic blanking...in watching the video, I saw several shots where it looked like (in my mind's eye) airflow could be blanked over the horizontal stab 😮
Main ‘characteristic’ was in cynical marketing, conventional tails are always better. See how they flight tested a model before committing a flesh and blood pilot to spin a T-tail twin, I bet he was looking forward to it!
@@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935 t-tails made the aircraft heavier, a bad trait in GA aircraft, with very little benefit. The additional structure that had to be added to the vertical stabilizer gave Pipers CG issues in all the wrong places. That's why Piper went back to conventional tails. They also received negative feedback from owners and pilots, who especially didn't like the fact that the T-tail got rid of the relationship of power settings and pitch in piston singles (due to prop wash and accelerated airflow behind the prop). Although they kept the T-tail on the Seminole.
The problem with spins is they are only recoverable if you have a lot of altitude. Unfortunately most spins happen in the pattern either on take off or landing. Almost always fatal.
I have a little over 50 hrs in that little twin. It really had almost no power. So full power on one engine and un feathered on the other… not surprised it can get out of a spin.
Don't even think a spin is recoverable with large-engine twins like B55/56/58, C310 etc. Those engines weight hundreds of pounds more than the lighter 16/180 HP engines and are mounted further outward. The additional weight and distance from center makes recovery a slim to none chance. Survival depends on arresting the spin in the incipient stage on most twin engine.
Jeez, you’d think after spending likely millions of dollars, you’d get approved for intentional spins. Not expecting anyone to do acro in a light twin, but man that is a lot of evidence that it’s just fine. The whole point of training is learning to do the unexpected things, so a twin-trainer approved for spins would presumably allow multi-engined pilots to practice (nowadays any 13 year old can fly a 747 into full acro on a highly realistic home-sim but in the 70s no such thing (fanciest back then would have been text based lunar-lander)
Anyone here actually had a spin in a light twin? Sometimes I feel like all the light twin training I did was dangerous given all the recent fatalities.
@@ricyoung7545 counter rotating props makes a twin spin test far safer. A better more realistic spin test is with one engine failed, then again with other engine on and other engine failed. Far more realistic because far more likely to spin in a twin with one engine out. I fly sailplanes, loved spin training in gliders, especially the over the top spin where plane rolls over into a spin, so fun. Far safer in a glider, no engine, no fuel, no engine instrumentation, no oil ...no heat or AC though... my AC was climbing in lift at 1 500 ft a minute to 12,000 plus asl my heat was lower altitudes like 6,000 asl, flew from airport in Colorado at 5,250asl! We had wave lift,, one guy got to 48,000ft asl, more typical flights were 20,000 to 35,000asl. Your ball is a peice of string taped to your windshield, far more accurate way to see taw in all attitudes. I guess in a twin I would tape a oeuce of string to the windshield as my yaw indicator, allways accurrate requires no power .
would be nice if they said how many thousand feet was lost in some of those spins. Any spin below 2000 or 3000 ft AGL likely is not recoverable if it goes more than half a turn.
They said recovery could be made in 1/8th if a turn, won’t lose much altitude with a good recovery. Few hundred feet at most unless you let it fully develop beyond the incipient stage.
Notice they didn't let a Baron get anywhere near these tests! And fought FAA AD proposal for NEEDED Baron ventral strake(s). WORST light twin in a spin.
Yeah except piston twins are designed for flying to a tolerable standard with a failed engine, the performance on one engine can be very modest, a gentle rate of climb only at low altitude will suffice and there is little margin for imperfect handling.
twin engine`= twin problem,twin,expensive twin go fuel lot. no thanks. only one engine cheap no need more and cheapen lot.and cheapen fly fuel not go lot.
