Spins and no 'chutes?

[Richard]

Ed's comment about going inverted in a spin got me wondering why spin training does not warrant the use of parachutes.

 

[bbchien]

Mostly because, you'd never make it out of the left seat of a right doored GA aircraft in a spin. You'd be pinned against the pilot side cabin wall.

Mostly because, I have to do five or six jumps before I felt again competent.

As in the Navy, you stand down from shooting at the Zodiac because you get more injuries worldwide firing the .50 cal machine. You occasionally get the USS Cole. Sigh.

 

[Michael]

If i recall, for ratings.... with a cfi on board, they are not required.

FAR 91 sec 307

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Never use 'em ....aren't they illegal ?

 

[poadeleted20]

I suspect that spin training with an instructor is one of the narrow exceptions to the parachute rule for aerobatics because there just aren't many accidents resulting. It is generally done in airplanes with fairly benign spin characteristics and good spin recovery characteristics, and with an instructor available to monitor the situation and initiate recovery if the trainee messes it up. I don't know of any accidents resulting from such spin training other than that one with the Tomahawk a few years ago, and that involves an airplane whose spin/spin recovery characteristics have been questioned.

 

[Diana]

Ed's comment about going inverted in a spin got me wondering why spin training does not warrant the use of parachutes.

Richard, I find the parachute issues somewhat confusing and not always logical. You aren't required by the FARs to use one if doing solo acro (unless the aircraft, like the Extra, requires the use of a parachute for all flights). Pilots at IAC-sanctioned competitions, glider competitions, and other events may be required to wear a properly certificated and inspected parachute. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. Forgive me if my wording is confusing; I just got out of the hot tub and haven't had my quota of morning coffee yet.

To quote 91.307:

(d) Paragraph (c) of this section does not apply to—

(1) Flight tests for pilot certification or rating; or

(2) Spins and other flight maneuvers required by the regulations for any certificate or rating when given by—

(i) A certificated flight instructor; or

(ii) An airline transport pilot instructing in accordance with §61.67 of this chapter.

There's an interesting commentary about that on the AOPA web site (not the forum) here:

http://www.aopa.org/members/ftmag/article.cfm?article=968

For those who aren't members and can't go on, here is the last paragraph of this commentary:

"Most primary trainers will easily and safely demonstrate spins, but few will accommodate bulky parachutes. If spin training were no longer required for any rating, most flight instructors and flight schools would probably forego spin training rather than spend the money necessary to buy parachutes and keep them properly rigged. A common-sense review of the regulations shows that it's legal for flight instructors to demonstrate spins without parachutes, and safety demands that flight instructors know how to recover from spins. Does yours?"

I still haven't figured out why I don't need one solo (I wear one anyway), but if I take a passenger I am required to wear one as well as my passenger.

Somebody explain the logic?

 

[Ken Ibold]

I find the parachute issues somewhat confusing and not always logical. You aren't required by the FARs to use one if doing solo acro.

snip

"A common-sense review of the regulations shows that it's legal for flight instructors to demonstrate spins without parachutes, and safety demands that flight instructors know how to recover from spins. Does yours?"

I still haven't figured out why I don't need one solo (I wear one anyway), but if I take a passenger I am required to wear one as well as my passenger.\

Somebody explain the logic?

The FARs generally grant you more leeway to hurt yourself than others, hence such things as currency requirements that only preclude you from taking passengers rather than, say, getting dual instruction.

In most Utility category airplanes, spin certification only goes a turn or two and remains in the incipient phase. Generally speaking, spin demonstrations also do not progress past the incipient phase, and it's easier to recover before the spin is fully developed.

As far as the 91.307 requirement that you wear a chute if you have a passenger, picture yourself in trouble in your airplane. You are not wearing a chute. Do you make the PIC decision to bail out? By eliminating that option, you put your passenger in peril.

 

[Diana]

As far as the 91.307 requirement that you wear a chute if you have a passenger, picture yourself in trouble in your airplane. You are not wearing a chute. Do you make the PIC decision to bail out? By eliminating that option, you put your passenger in peril.

Well, that makes sense now. Thanks Ken.

 

[gismo]

I still haven't figured out why I don't need one solo (I wear one anyway), but if I take a passenger I am required to wear one as well as my passenger.

Somebody explain the logic?

Logic? You want LOGIC? We're the FAA and we don't need no stinkin LOGIC!

I suspect that the parachute requirement came as a result of the barnstormer era where pilots would fly acro to impress their passengers with the pilot's god like skills. Wouldn't surprise me to find that a few unlucky souls fell out.

Personally, I don't think chutes ought to be required for spins. To begin with a large percentage of chute wearers have never been "under canopy" and probably couldn't exit a spinning airplane with or without a chute, let alone sucessfully float to the ground in one piece. Besides if you work with the FAA's acro hard deck of 1500 AGL what are the chances that you'd actually be able to crawl out of an airplane stuck in a spin and/or with a broken wing before hitting the ground, especially if you don't have an open cockpit or jettisonable canopy?

I'd be interested to see just how many souls have been saved by wearing chutes while doing intentional spins. I wouldn't be surprised if the total was practically zero.

 

[Diana]

Besides if you work with the FAA's acro hard deck of 1500 AGL what are the chances that you'd actually be able to crawl out of an airplane stuck in a spin and/or with a broken wing before hitting the ground, especially if you don't have an open cockpit or jettisonable canopy?

Well, dang it Lance. You've shattered my illusion that I'll be able to get out of the Citabria in time.

I'd be interested to see just how many souls have been saved by wearing chutes while doing intentional spins. I wouldn't be surprised if the total was practically zero.

Maybe Ken can answer that one for us. I bet he has those numbers somewhere.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Well, dang it Lance. You've shattered my illusion that I'll be able to get out of the Citabria in time.

Maybe Ken can answer that one for us. I bet he has those numbers somewhere.

Practically zero. The total number of emergency chute saves is a handful per year. I would say spin related saves are probably on the order of one every four or five years at most.

 

[Toby]

The total number of emergency chute saves is a handful per year.

In what kinds of situations do the chutes actually save people?

 

[Ken Ibold]

In what kinds of situations do the chutes actually save people?

The largest category I have seen ... and again the sample size is very small, almost to the point of being anecdotal ... is structural failure of homebuilt aerobatic airplanes during aerobatics.

 

[gismo]

The largest category I have seen ... and again the sample size is very small, almost to the point of being anecdotal ... is structural failure of homebuilt aerobatic airplanes during aerobatics.

I can believe that, but how many structural failures have occurred in production airplanes engaged in spin training?

 

[Skyport]

FYI-

At one time chute were required for spins, the old turtle-back 150's lower seat cushion could be removed and the pan was designed for a seat pack. In the early 60's, not sure of the exact year, the FAA removed the requirement at the instigation of the industry. By that time there was a decline in interest in aerobatics and the flight training industry argued that it made little sense to maintain pararchutes just to do the spin training required for a CFI rating.

Tom-

 

[Skyport]

FYI-

In addition to Diana's 91.307 list the FAA requires parachutes, with current packing date, be worn during an airshow performance....................I seriously doubt my ability to pop the door, release my seatbelts, exit, and open my chute if something happens at 500'AGL?????????????????????????

Tom-

 

[Ken Ibold]

I can believe that, but how many structural failures have occurred in production airplanes engaged in spin training?

I don't know of any in the last 10 years in certified airplanes. There was the Lancair (wasn't it?) during certification spin testing when the chute wouldn't release, but that doesn't count.