Spin Training - Stearman or Waco?

Fearless Tower

Fearless Tower

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
16,473
Location
Norfolk, VA
Display Name
Display name:
Fearless Tower
Need to get my spin training/endorsement in the not too distant future for my CFI and was thinking that it might be fun to try it in something other than the standard trainer.


First question is - are Stearmans legally certified for spins? I know T-6s are not, but thought that PT-17s were ok.

Second, anyone know of any places (Southwest preferred) that offer spin training in Stearmans or Wacos?
 
While stearmans or Waco's would be cool, a Citabria would be a lot of fun too!

I did my tailwheel and spin training in a Citabria and had a blast. Very responsive and predictable spin. When in Ohio I had the opportunity to fly in a stearman and the CFI spun that, seemed much more docile than the Citabria.
 
I think it's a good idea to get the spin endorsement in an aerobatic aircraft, rather than in a 172 or DA-20 or other "spinnable" training aircraft. Here's why:

  • The airframe will be better equipped to handle the stress of a ham-fisted first timer.
  • You'll be able to get a full spin with "normal" rather than "absurd" cross-controlled inputs - you'll still have to do some work to get the spin started, but not as much. The reverse of this, once you see how much work is required to get a spin-friendly airplane to spin, you'll feel more comfortable when you're doing stalls in your 172 later on because you'll have an appreciation for how far behind you have to get to have one of those enter a full spin.
  • An instructor who specializes teaching in that sort of airplane will probably have a better appreciation of the spin. These folks treat spins like a neurosurgeon treats messing in your frontal lobe - a "normal" occurence - pay attention but don't get excited. That familiarity goes a long way towards making the student (you) comfortable, especially if this is the first time you'll have been upside down in an airplane.
I did mine in a decathalon with an aerobatic competitor and instructor.

Be sure and do a falling-leaf sequence as part of your training - it helps reinforce the "fix it with your feet" paradigm.
 
TMetzinger said:
I think it's a good idea to get the spin endorsement in an aerobatic aircraft, rather than in a 172 or DA-20 or other "spinnable" training aircraft. Here's why:

  • The airframe will be better equipped to handle the stress of a ham-fisted first timer.
  • You'll be able to get a full spin with "normal" rather than "absurd" cross-controlled inputs - you'll still have to do some work to get the spin started, but not as much. The reverse of this, once you see how much work is required to get a spin-friendly airplane to spin, you'll feel more comfortable when you're doing stalls in your 172 later on because you'll have an appreciation for how far behind you have to get to have one of those enter a full spin.
  • An instructor who specializes teaching in that sort of airplane will probably have a better appreciation of the spin. These folks treat spins like a neurosurgeon treats messing in your frontal lobe - a "normal" occurence - pay attention but don't get excited. That familiarity goes a long way towards making the student (you) comfortable, especially if this is the first time you'll have been upside down in an airplane.
Click to expand...
  • You can find out what happens if you eff up a recovery - like shove the stick forward while still rotating. (Wheeee!!!)
  • You can see what an inverted spin looks like
  • You can find out what happens if you eff up a recovery - like get into a "crossover" spin
  • You can find out what happens if you eff up an entry - like leave the power in
  • You can learn how to get out of a flat, accelerated, or inverted spin.
I wouldn't want to try any of those in a 172, or a...
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
  • You can find out what happens if you eff up a recovery - like shove the stick forward while still rotating. (Wheeee!!!)
  • You can see what an inverted spin looks like
  • You can find out what happens if you eff up a recovery - like get into a "crossover" spin
  • You can find out what happens if you eff up an entry - like leave the power in
  • You can learn how to get out of a flat, accelerated, or inverted spin.
I wouldn't want to try any of those in a 172, or a...
Click to expand...


I've done all in a C172 and it was good training.
 
I'll second the recommendation for getting your spin training from a really competent aerobatic instructor in a certified aerobatic bird. You'll get so much more out of it than just checking off the "spins" while indulging in some open cockpit nostalgia flying. Go get the best spin training you can afford and then go find some Waco/Stearman time - they'll both be a hoot!

If you need some recommendations, the IAC web site is a good place to go:

http://www.iacusn.org/schools/index.php
 
I'd do it in both. Definitely get a good spin instructor. Mine was an older FAC pilot from Vietnam and he was FEARLESS in a spin. Did a good job of explaining things, correcting me, and calmly talking through everything. It doesn't hurt, though, to do the spins in whatever airplane you're most likely to be teaching in if they are approved for the airplane. Then if a student really does mess up somehow, you're proficient in THAT airplane.

Ryan
 
The Waco spin's quite nice. We have a YMF-5c at my work, its pretty fun. But you would probably get more out of spins if you used a Super D or Citabria.
 
Stearman spins very nicely from what I remember and you'd probably never rip the wings off. Don't know much about the Waco.

There is nothing that prohibits aerobatics in a stearman that I've ever seen. They're damn strong and have been used in all kinds of airshows for generations.
 
dmccormack said:
No.. didn't read that carefully.

Inverted, power on (momentarily), cross-controlled, high power steep angle, yada, yada...

Over two sessions I learned all the different ways students would try to kill me.

:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

You did inverted spins in a Cessna 172?
 
Diana said:
You did inverted spins in a Cessna 172?
Click to expand...

Fuel starvation is the only way to get any sort of excitement out of a 172. :D

Upright spin entries in most planes put you somewhat (momentarily) inverted during the incipient phase. I think that's what he was talking about...basic upright spin entry.
 
Old thread revival I know, but stock Stearmans are certificated for spins (upright and inverted) as well as any aerobatics the airframe can handle (+6/-3Gs)

Stearmans equipped with the Pratt & Whitney R-985 are prohibited from spins because of CG limitations. The 450 has a shorter engine mount and weighs more than a stock engine and puts the CG farther aft.

Snap rolls are also not recommended in 450s as there have been more than a couple of famous airshow performers perish from the mounts ripping loose during snaps.

Mike-
 
stearmann4 said:
Old thread revival I know, but stock Stearmans are certificated for spins (upright and inverted) as well as any aerobatics the airframe can handle (+6/-3Gs)

Stearmans equipped with the Pratt & Whitney R-985 are prohibited from spins because of CG limitations. The 450 has a shorter engine mount and weighs more than a stock engine and puts the CG farther aft.

Snap rolls are also not recommended in 450s as there have been more than a couple of famous airshow performers perish from the mounts ripping loose during snaps.

Mike-
Click to expand...
Which is why my great great uncle, Johnny Vasey, quit flying all together. He was pretty famous in his day doing airshows in a 450 Stearman. He was quite convinced the mount was not safe and designed a superior one but the FAA wasn't letting him use it. He simply quit and flew model airplanes from then on out.

A friend of his was then killed shortly then after when a mount failed.

Or so I'm told.
 
whifferdill said:
Upright spin entries in most planes put you somewhat (momentarily) inverted during the incipient phase. I think that's what he was talking about...basic upright spin entry.
Click to expand...

You been forcing your spin entries again? :D:D

That's a good quote on the 172 - I'm gonna use that.
 
PittsDriver said:
You been forcing your spin entries again? :D:D
Click to expand...

I always get mixed up between those spin and snap symbols on my sequence card. :)

Good to see you back on here. Hope you get your ass back to some contests soon!
 
whifferdill said:
I always get mixed up between those spin and snap symbols on my sequence card. :)

Good to see you back on here. Hope you get your ass back to some contests soon!
Click to expand...

I'm galavanting all summer long through mid-Septemer but have every intention of coming to the Mason-Dixon Clash in October and embarrassing myself. Next year I plan to be back in the saddle for the whole season. I really miss coming to contests.
 
There's nothing wrong with the certified Serv-Aero mounts which are in common use these days by 450 Stearman guys.

If you Google some old video footage of Bill Adams or Rollie Cole performing in their 450s, you'll see why they had problems. They were doing stuff with a 450 Stearman that we wouldn't even consider today. This mounts and air-frames just weren't designed for that kind of centrifugal and rotational force and extra weight. All the current 450 Stearman performers now fly smooth, positive routines.

It's the engine combo, not the airplane as evidenced by John Mohr who uses the snap roll and some tumbling as a staple in his stock Stearman routine.

Mike-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top