Altitude loss goal for two-turn spin recovery, C172?

[SunDog]

Anyone (CFIs?) have a good target value for minimum altitude loss, from a two-turn spin, Cessna 172? Entering from either power off stall, or accelerated/departure stall? (rotating left). Assume recovry is begun immediatley after the second rotation is complete? Tips on recovery technique/suggestions also welcome, beyond POH/PARE . Looking for the absolute minimum in altitude loss. . .And has anyone sustained a multi-turn spin in a C 172, say six turns or more? Do you have to maintain or increase pro-spin control inputs?

Also, will a C172 retain enough energy to complete a loop, entering from the top of the yellow arc? I've used a sim for the loop, but looking for real world experince from someone who has been there.
Thanks!

[PHall]

You trying to get the WING OFF light to come on or something?

[A.Member]

Anyone (CFIs?) have a good target value for minimum altitude loss, from a two-turn spin, Cessna 172? Entering from either power off stall, or accelerated/departure stall? (rotating left)....And has anyone sustained a multi-turn spin in a C 172, say six turns or more? Do you have to maintain or increase pro-spin control inputs?

If you have a spin on departure with 6 or more rotations, the only recovery is going to be that of your body and anyone else unfortunate to be in the airplane at the time.

Also, will a C172 retain enough energy to complete a loop, entering from the top of the yellow arc? I've used a sim for the loop, but looking for real world experince from someone who has been there.

Kind of puzzled as to why you're asking this? It's not really a "real world" scenario.  None of our aircraft are rated for aerobatics and, even it they were, they're prohibited by regs.  Can it be done?  Sure but guys that are interested in aerobatics aren't stepping out in 172s.

[SunDog]

Departure stall in this sense means a stall in TO config, high power, slow AS, high AOA. Those are usually demonstrated at altitude, unless the airplane is no longer needed.

It may depend on the model, but most 172's are legal spinners in the utility category, I believe.  Not a big hairy evoloution in a 172, and easy recovery. Loop is another critter - fall out of an accidental hammerhead, get spinning inverted, push instead of pull, and that very low negative G limit in a 172 could hurt you.

To the point, though; I'm interested in real-world numbers for a couple of airplanes: SF-260, C-172, and Long-EZ. The SF-260 I can get myself. I don't mind spinning a 172, but I haven't sustained spins in one beyond two or three turns. One real-world (honest) report is worth a week of research. Is there a goblin waiting on you after multiple turns? And I ain't gonna attempt a loop in 172, but if someone has, and would like to share some data, that would be great, and I will be discreet.

I did royally botch a roll attempt in a 172 many years ago - youthful folly - not to be repeated.

Anyway, my purpose is proprietary, but involves simulation SW & HW, and measuring some accelerations, and building a better moustrap in the corners of the envelope. Those who consider the aircraft I've mentioned may deduce my intent.

So,  accuracy is good, but I can smooth data, and am not looking to get hurt in the pursuit. There are a lot of 172 pilots in CAP, with broad experience. Many CFIs, for instance, have spun 172 s routinely, in thier own training, and in training others. Did I mention I would be discreet? I don't care who the airplane was registered to at the time you gained your experience, just the model 172 and engine HP.

I hope I'll get what I need on the Long-EZ at the Rough River fly-in next month. So, if you have 172 true confessions, IRT 172 spin sustainment, recovery, and remember airspeeds, altitude loss, and/or looped the beast, respond and we'll do comms off line?

[A.Member]

Departure stall in this sense means a stall in TO config, high power, slow AS, high AOA. Those are usually demonstrated at altitude, unless the airplane is no longer needed.

I know what it is...stalls of any kind during departure are critical.  If you actually enter a spin at this point, you're having a really bad day. 

These are practiced at a safety altitude, primarily so that entry can be recognized, avoided, and recovery learned.  That said, if you actually enter a spin on departure, you're likely to kill yourself.  Studies have shown that with quick recognition and action, average altitude loss during spin recovery can be nearly 1200 ft.  You don't need to be rocket scientist to do that math. 

It may depend on the model, but most 172's are legal spinners in the utility category, I believe.  Not a big hairy evoloution in a 172, and easy recovery. Loop is another critter - fall out of an accidental hammerhead, get spinning inverted, push instead of pull, and that very low negative G limit in a 172 could hurt you.

To the point, though; I'm interested in real-world numbers for a couple of airplanes: SF-260, C-172, and Long-EZ. The SF-260 I can get myself. I don't mind spinning a 172, but I haven't sustained spins in one beyond two or three turns. One real-world (honest) report is worth a week of research. Is there a goblin waiting on you after multiple turns? And I ain't gonna attempt a loop in 172, but if someone has, and would like to share some data, that would be great, and I will be discreet.

I did royally botch a roll attempt in a 172 many years ago - youthful folly - not to be repeated.

Anyway, my purpose is proprietary, but involves simulation SW & HW, and measuring some accelerations, and building a better moustrap in the corners of the envelope. Those who consider the aircraft I've mentioned may deduce my intent.

So,  accuracy is good, but I can smooth data, and am not looking to get hurt in the pursuit. There are a lot of 172 pilots in CAP, with broad experience. Many CFIs, for instance, have spun 172 s routinely, in thier own training, and in training others. Did I mention I would be discreet? I don't care who the airplane was registered to at the time you gained your experience, just the model 172 and engine HP.

I hope I'll get what I need on the Long-EZ at the Rough River fly-in next month. So, if you have 172 true confessions, IRT 172 spin sustainment, recovery, and remember airspeeds, altitude loss, and/or looped the beast, respond and we'll do comms off line?

Are you actually a pilot or do you just play FS?  <= serious question 

Your questions and comments don't really align with those I'd expect from someone that actually has a certificate.  I don't know anyone (and wouldn't fly with anyone) that would attempt to perform aerobatics in a non-rated aircraft; I don't know of any aerobat rated 172's (that doesn't mean they couldn't exist...I've just never heard of one).   

[Pingree1492]

Wow... can I be your life insurance beneficiary?  Not sure why anyone would want to do this in a 172.

It may depend on the model, but most 172's are legal spinners in the utility category, I believe.  Not a big hairy evoloution in a 172, and easy recovery. Loop is another critter - fall out of an accidental hammerhead, get spinning inverted, push instead of pull, and that very low negative G limit in a 172 could hurt you.

A)  It depends GREATLY upon the model, and the ones that do allow it, to FLY in the utility category, you'll probably need less than 1/2 fuel in the wings, no pax, and nothing in the rear, and even then you're pretty stupid to try it because there's a good chance you're going to weaken and fatigue the airframe, possibly even cracking a spar or rib, something that you CANNOT see or inspect without an A&P mechanic's help.  Spins and other types of maneuvers put enormous stress on the airframe, and while it may not show its damage right away, doesn't mean you can't get someone else killed somewhere down the road because you damaged something no one could see until it broke.
B)  You do realize why many Cessna high-wing aircraft have a 'very low negative G limit' right?


If you want to be a hotshot and do aerobatics (and come on, let's admit we all do), you get an aircraft designed and built to withstand the stress that aerobatic maneuvers put the airframe under.  A C172 was NOT built for that purpose.  While flying is fun, it's not a game, and bragging rights get you nowhere if you're dead.

[JeffDG]

Speaking of multiple turn spins...here's a 60 (no, not a typo...six-zero) turn spin in a C-150:
60-Turn Spin in a Cessna Aerobat!

[Cliff_Chambliss]

Visit the Cessna Website/bookstore.  They have a book Stall and Spin Charateristics of Cessna 100 series aircraft, including the 150, 152, 172, and 177.  Each model is further subdivided as necessary.  At last look the book sold for around $12.00.
or,
google "Cessna Stall Spin Charateristics and there is a pdf copy (not the greatest copy) posted there for free.

[SunDog]

Gad. That exceeds my fun factor. . .previous poster, yes, I am a pilot. You may have misunderstood my question, I think. I'm looking for real-world information to refine and polish a model. Note my comment concerning sim SW and HW project. I'm not (and didn't) advocate aerobatics in a 172. But if you have something to share, particularly concerning spin experience, or managing energy (loop) in a 172, I'd be interested in the anecdotes and any technique tips you have, or surprises you encountered.

Again, as I said, I don't want to loop a 172, but it's likeky someone has and would share thier experience with me. As for spins, there shouldn't be any reason to unduly stress a 172, unless the post recovery dive is allowed to go too far.  A lot of check rides include sustained two G turns, and with care, a spin won't, by nature, exceed that. As someone else said, have the aicraft in the utility category limits before heading out.

Also, not too interested in any negative G events in a 172 - the model failure mode will occur early in those situations, and there isn't much point in writing code for showing parts raining down.

To summarize - if you have had past experience in sustaining spins or looping a 172 and will share what you learned with me, I will keep it to myself.

[SunDog]

Visit the Cessna Website/bookstore.  They have a book Stall and Spin Charateristics of Cessna 100 series aircraft, including the 150, 152, 172, and 177.  Each model is further subdivided as necessary.  At last look the book sold for around $12.00.
or,
google "Cessna Stall Spin Charateristics and there is a pdf copy (not the greatest copy) posted there for free.

Thank you, much appreciated. Also looking into the nooks and crannies of control forces, acceleartions, and rates. The hard data is sometimes published, though I think it's often derived instead of measured. I want to get the force feedback and visual (rate) clues close to real world, even though it may be have to be subjective. The SF-260 is safe to "explore" in.  Not much room for error, negative G, in a 172.

[PHall]

Doing a loop in a Cessna 172 in front of a FAA examiner would probably be the immediate end to your flying career.
The aircraft is not built for it and is not certified for it and doing it intentionally would cause the FAA to question your judgement.

The Cessna 150 Acrobat is the only Cessna 100 series aircraft that is legal for acrobatics. And even it has some restrictions on what you can do.

[SunDog]

Thank you, I'm sure you are correct; so I'll presume from your response that you haven't any insights to share regarding my questions, then. . .

To reiterate, once more, I'd be grateful to hear from anyone with experience and observations concerning sustained spins and or loops/attempted loops in a 172.

Thanks to all who have responded already about the legality, morality, poor judgement, etc., concerning aerobatics. Got all that I can use, thank you! Pretty sure we all know 172s are not for looping. And pretty sure we all know some pilots might have done so, and that's who I'm reaching out to.

So, if in your distant past (or yesterday) you learned something about sustained spins and/or 172 behaviour when performing or attempting to perform a loop, I'd like to hear from you. Discretion assured.

I ask in order to refine (polish?) a project I've begun. Of the three aircraft I'd like to model, the 172 has the slimmest margin for error, and I don't want to get squished in the pursuit of knowledge. If you have done the deeds, and will share your impressions, no aircraft will be harmed in making this sim.

[Pingree1492]

You might have better luck just searching youtube videos.  There are several from inside the cockpit, and you can clearly see the altitude they enter/exit the spin at, and can probably more accurately count the number of spins than anything you're going to get from ancedotal accounts.  Here's an example:

Cessna 172 Spin Recovery Training (Full HD w/ audio)

When you start talking about loops and hammerheads and negative G-loads in a post though... most people will look at that a bit crosseyed, hence the responses. 

[A.Member]

Thanks to all who have responded already about the legality, morality, poor judgement, etc., concerning aerobatics. Got all that I can use, thank you! Pretty sure we all know 172s are not for looping. And pretty sure we all know some pilots might have done so, and that's who I'm reaching out to.

Why would you be "pretty sure" about that?  I wouldn't be.  Quite the opposite actually...I've done aerobatics and know people that do.  I'm pretty sure I don't know anyone that's attempted to loop a 172 for exactly the reasons listed.  Rather, we find the right airplane.

You want to know what it's like, turn on FS, X Plane, et al and see how they do it.  You should expect nothing other than the responses you've received so far in coming to a CAP board and asking for anyone that has broken FARs and violated laws of common sense to talk to you about it. 

[JeffDG]

When you start talking about loops and hammerheads and negative G-loads in a post though... most people will look at that a bit crosseyed, hence the responses.

And those folks aren't reading what he's writing.

He's developing a simulator...

He's not talking about looping an actual C172, but was looking for real-world data to assist with developing a SIMULATOR of doing so.

[SunDog]

Pingree, JeffDg, Cliff, and my two other off-line contributers (discretion assured!):

Thank you for the references and obsevations. I appreciate you taking the time to read and understand. It seems some sims could be refined a good bit in the behaviour and performance in unusal or extreme attitudes. Just my opinion, but there is room for refinement in modeling upsets and recoveries from bad situations.

So I did get some wheat from the chaff. Given the nature of this forum, I did expect some responses to be less than considered. I dove in anyway, thinking about the large pool of C172 experince represented here.

[Cliff_Chambliss]

I would suggest contacting Catherine Cavanaugh (sp?) inSwanee, TN.  She is the heir apparent to The late Bill Kerschner, who was probably the best spin instructor in the country.  If anyone has the data you are looking for it will be Ms Cavanaugh.

[Eclipse]

So I did get some wheat from the chaff. Given the nature of this forum, I did expect some responses to be less than considered. I dove in anyway, thinking about the large pool of C172 experince represented here.

"Less then considered?"

You didn't indicate this was for a simulator in the OP.  This kind of post, coupled with some of your other comments about what you feel is "important" in CAP, are the kinds of things that raise legitimate eyebrows.

FYI - this isn't a general aviation forum, nor is it a PC sim forum, so for the most part, anything you ask is going to be viewed and answered through a CAP filter.

[SunDog]

Some pilots read the post, shared some knowledge, and I am grateful. Some learning comes from experience, including  episodes of bad judgement and youthful folly. Aviation mags are full of "I Learned About Flying From That" kind of features, and sometimes those experiences are dangerous acts and FAR violations.

If you think my post is out of line, refer it to the moderator. You have opinions about my other posts, and you expressed them. Fair enough, we don't agree; I can live with that. You'll have to, as well.

Posing C172 behaviour questions to a forum peopled by what may be the world's largest group of C172 pilots didn't feel out of line to me. If the moderator disagrees, I'll apologize and go away. And unless you are the moderator, I don't need your concurrence or permission for posts.

I didn't ask a sim question, I asked about experience with aircraft performance/behaviour. And this is a GA related forum, since those are the aircraft CAP flies. My questions upset some folks, so, early in the thread, I made my purpose clearer.

[Brad]

Spoke with a guy who's stall spin certified for a C172, he said opposite aileron, opposite rudder, reduce power, nose to the horizon with regards to the spin. He also says for the loop, simply "Yes", as he's done it, not on purpose, heh.

He said to email him if you want to know more. James Ezell, txlonghorn8783@gmail.com

[SunDog]

Thank you!  PM  on the way.

Looks like "off-line" is the way to do comms on this. Good info coming in, and doesn't upset other folks.