Hey Everyone,

Just wondering If anyone knows if this is possible? I know you have to do a spin and spiral dive recovery, which you would be unable to do in a twin. Easily done at another time in a 172. But are there any restrictions that limit the type of A/C you use on your flight test?


Thanks,

NE

Asides from the standard comment... Have you looked in CARs?

This is quoted from TP13462, which you may want to read.

Aircraft and Equipment Requirements:
The candidate will provide:
(a) an aeroplane for the flight test that:
(i) has a flight authority pursuant to CAR 507 and that authority has no operating limitations that prohibit the performance of the required manoeuvres, including intentional spins;
(ii) meets the requirements of CAR Standard 425.23 Training Aircraft Requirements - subsections (1), (2), (3) and (4) of the Personnel Licensing Standards.
(b) appropriate current aeronautical charts and Canada Flight Supplement.
(c) an effective means of excluding outside visual reference to simulate instrument flight conditions, while maintaining a safe level of visibility for the examiner.
Note: More than one aeroplane may be provided to satisfy the requirements of the flight test, if evidence of having received instruction on each type of aeroplane is presented.

So by my very hasty read of regulations, yes, you could do it from a legal perspective.

But WHY?

I can think of a whole number of practical reasons NOT to do it this way. But I'm sure others in this forum can lay in on those with energy and vigour.

Z.

I think that the K.I.S.S. (Keep it simple, Stupid) principle would be the best way to approach this.. You could do it in a twin, but why? What will you gain by doing so, and what could you lose? What if the engine quits; what if, under the added stress of a ride, you forget the gear; how about getting the nav part screwed up because the twin moves somewhat faster.... In my mind, because you are under the stress of a ride (and probably, your expectations of a career for yourself) it's a much better choice to stick with the tried-and-true plane that you've done the majority of your training in..

what twin is certified for intentional spins?

I know a person who did his PPL test in a PC-12, which is not certified for spins. All of the portions of the test that could be conducted in the PC-12 were carried out using that aircraft. A few days later, he did the spin and spiral dive portion of the test in a C-152.

He just felt more comfortable (competent) in the PC-12 than the small Cessna.

PanEuropean wrote:I know a person who did his PPL test in a PC-12, which is not certified for spins. All of the portions of the test that could be conducted in the PC-12 were carried out using that aircraft. A few days later, he did the spin and spiral dive portion of the test in a C-152.

He just felt more comfortable (competent) in the PC-12 than the small Cessna.

was it his dads plane? I can just see the $800 sun glasses perched on his head.

No, it was his own plane, and he is a very humble, easy to get along with person.

After he got the pilot licence, he didn't fly the plane again. It had always been flown for him by a professional pilot, and he obtained the PPL only because the professional pilot encouraged him to do so (the pilot thought the process would be enjoyable for the owner). After the owner got the PPL, he retired to his usual seat in the back of the plane and lost interest in flying it.

Was that the former arms dealer from the Balkans ?

The forced approach and pwr-off 180 accuracy approach would be very intersting to say the least. How well does your twin glide with both engines failed?

How well does your twin glide with both engines failed?

You can pull both throttles back in a twin, just like you can a single. However, without the props feathered, the windmilling props generally create enormous drag, so you had better be close in, if you are going to make the power-off 180 work Think of a Pitts approach.

Feathering both engines to improve the glide would probably not be appreciated by the examiner!

PS I would not pull both throttles back to idle, and have the props drive the engines, on the geared C421. However on a little Lyc O-360 Duchess or Seminole, it won't hurt to pull both throttles back to idle on downwind abeam the numbers.

PPS Decades ago, I did my PPL on our family Maule, which is placarded against spins. I had to go up with the examiner a second time, to do a spin in a 172 to complete my PPL flight test.

Hedley wrote:

PS I would not pull both throttles back to idle, and have the props drive the engines, on the geared C421. However on a little Lyc O-360 Duchess or Seminole, it won't hurt to pull both throttles back to idle on downwind abeam the numbers.

i tried this once in a seminole. 1500' agl crossing midfield and kept it as tight as the turn radius would allow. by the time i finished my base turn i was applying throttle again cause i had no chance of making it! good experience though, gives you a good impression of the glide characteristics - or lack thereof - of an unfeathered twin.

i had an instructor who always told the story of his buddy who did a ride in a twin. same as the pc-12 story, the candidate took up a 152 to do the spins.

I had a double engine failure given to me in a PPC ride (Piper Apache). The Fed examiner said I had picked up a load of contaminated fuel and both engines had just failed so I simulated the feather and set zero thrust on both. I found the aircraft glided about like a chocolate bar wing Cherokee and had no trouble making the PFL into my chosen field. I learned two things that day

1) The aircrafts POH did not have a power off glide speed, but flying the Vy speed worked well, and

2) Don't get jacky with the examiner

PanEuropean wrote:I know a person who did his PPL test in a PC-12, which is not certified for spins. All of the portions of the test that could be conducted in the PC-12 were carried out using that aircraft. A few days later, he did the spin and spiral dive portion of the test in a C-152.

He just felt more comfortable (competent) in the PC-12 than the small Cessna.

And why was he required to do a spin for a PPL...what country was that in ?

All you are required to do is recover from a spin, as well as a spiral dive during your PPl training. Buddy lets keep things in perspective, you bs your friends, and let other people bs theirs, but please dont come here and BS us.

Cheers and Happy Landings!!!

I had to do a spin on my PPL flight test in Canada (possibly before you were born). I spun a 172, and did the rest of the PPL test on a Maule, which oddly was not certified for spins.

The spin was removed from the PPL flight test in Canada in the late 90's IIRC.

I'm not BS'ing you or anybody else, btw.

Air China spiral dove a 747 over the pacific

Yes. They went supersonic during the descent, and after landing on the west coast, Boeing engineers looked at the 1.5 degrees permanent set in the wings and said, "Fly it".

If it ain't boeing, I ain't going

You simply can't compare the engineering of a Boeing to say an Airbus, which sheds it's tail at the first sign of turbulence. Or rudder use.

I used a Warrior for my CPL test, and took up a 172 to do my spin. All my time was on the Warrior. I felt more comfortable doing the ride on it.

If it ain't boeing, I ain't going

Not a bad idea..

Air China spiral dove a 747 over the pacific

I'm thinking that if it were an Air China boeing, I ain't going either!

Hedley wrote:Yes. They went supersonic during the descent, and after landing on the west coast, Boeing engineers looked at the 1.5 degrees permanent set in the wings and said, "Fly it".

If it ain't boeing, I ain't going

You simply can't compare the engineering of a Boeing to say an Airbus, which sheds it's tail at the first sign of turbulence. Or rudder use.

"If it ain't Boeing I ain't going!" Like seriously, if the airline at the last minute substitutes an A320 for a 737; you are going to leave your bags and rebook?

You don't know me very well. I truly detest flying commercially at the best of times. I recently drove to Key West and back to renew my ICAS card.

I had to do a spin on my PPL flight test in Canada (possibly before you were born). I spun a 172, and did the rest of the PPL test on a Maule, which oddly was not certified for spins.
The spin was removed from the PPL flight test in Canada in the late 90's IIRC.
I'm not BS'ing you or anybody else,

Likewise, did my ride in 1977. I did a one turn spin and the examiner said "you call that a spin .. I want to see at least 3 turns"

Sounds like the ICAS (SAC card) flight test - a 3 turn spin is required there, too!

A trick I teach for the multi-turn spin is to slightly back off the rudder input after one turn, when it naturally tends to tighten up

I agree with your original (and now likely long-dead from old age) examiner that one turn does NOT stabilize a spin - you are still incipient.

I remember during my PPL being demonstrated a 'spin'. I started turning green after the fifth semi-incipient-spin-turned-spiral-dive and my instructor said, 'well, I guess we'll just say you've been demonstrated a spin'.

I never did any more spins until like a week before my CPL ride, where I got a slightly better instructor and aircraft and got one spin demo. 'That seems pretty nose down!' 'Well that's what [my limited experience tells me] a spin looks like.

Next was in EMT in a Citabria, a six-turn spin. 'Just count how many times the sun passes by the windshield!' Holy crap, this is what a spin looks like!

Hedley wrote:Yes. They went supersonic during the descent, and after landing on the west coast, Boeing engineers looked at the 1.5 degrees permanent set in the wings and said, "Fly it".

If it ain't boeing, I ain't going

You simply can't compare the engineering of a Boeing to say an Airbus, which sheds it's tail at the first sign of turbulence. Or rudder use.

Boeing and rudder issues...
The PCU use to be a huge problem.

Following crash due to rudder problems:
On March 3, 1991, United Airlines Flight 585, a 737-200, crashed in Colorado Springs, CO, killing 25 people.
On June 6, 1992, a Copa Airlines 737 flipped and crashed into a jungle in Panama, killing 47 people.
On September 8, 1994, USAir Flight 427, a 737-300, crashed near Pittsburgh, PA, killing 132 people.
On April 11, 1994, Continental Airlines pilot Ray Miller reported his plane roll violently to the right, and the plane landed safely.
On June 9, 1996, Eastwind Airlines Flight 517, a 737-200 experienced loss of rudder control while on approach to Richmond, VA.
On February 23, 1999, MetroJet Flight 2710, a 737-200, experienced a slow deflection of the rudder to its blowdown limit while flying at 33,000 feet above Salisbury, Maryland.

Anyway I fly Boeing, so I am happy they decided to redesign their rudder, still Boeing has a long story with rudder issues... 2 PCU better than only one when it comes to rudders...

Boeing and rudder issues...The PCU used to be a huge problem

Quite true. There was a nasty problem where under some extreme shock cooling scenarios it, IIRC it would reverse operation. Some pilots dealt with it and landed, some didn't.

But hey, at least it stayed on the airplane