PDA

View Full Version : Inverted flat spins...



SabreF-86
04-15-2005, 02:29 AM
Got stuck in one last nite, couldn't get out no way no how. Finally bailed out at 300m after fighting it from 5000m. Second time in one, this time in a I-16, last time in a Hurricane. Anyone know how to get out of one?

Sabre

BBB_Hyperion
04-15-2005, 03:19 AM
Roll into the spin stick slightly forward gear flaps etc out . If not possible roll against it then use correct moment and push to opposite roll.

darkhorizon11
04-15-2005, 11:32 AM
Stalls and spin entry isn't modeled right really. But autorotation is somewhat correct...

To get out of it pull the power back to idle. LEAVE THE AILERONS NEUTRAL NOT DEFLECTED. And the use rudder FULL opposite the direction of the spin. Depending on the aircraft it may also help to pitch forward with the elevator also.

Let it be known however that some aircraft in the game are unrecoverable in spins, like the P-39 and P-63 because of the engine location. If you spin it below 500 meters or so you might as well bail in almost any plane because you won't recover in time.

Viel Gluck!

LEXX_Luthor
04-15-2005, 07:29 PM
They say Beaufighter does not recover either, and I don't know if anybody here has done it (I don't really fly it so I dunno). It has been posted here that the real life Beau pilot manual said Do Not Spin. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

TX-EcoDragon
04-16-2005, 01:44 PM
In general the inverted spins are, and should be, easier to recover than upright. The difficulty comes from the same things that make all spin recoveries troublesome, lack of training/practice on the correct pilot responses, incorrect determination of the direction of yaw (incorrect focal point or simple confusion are common). . . and last but not least, improper aircraft loading, damage, or poor design.

In the sim some "in-spin" aileron can be helpful in the strange spiral that some planes enter instead of a spin (like Ta152) but generally aileron is the control to worry about the least, and it is generally best to leave it neutral in the sim (and often critical in the real world as adding power flattens the spin).
Proper spin recovery in general is done in the following way:

Power-Off
Ailerons-Neutral
Rudder-Opposite the direction of yaw
Elevator-Through neutral to lower angle of attack (so push forward if upright or pull back if inverted, to drive the nose towards the ground and lower the angle of attack)

doing these out of order, or omitting one step will generally prevent recovery, or may lead to a transitional or cross-over spin that is far more confusing than the initial spin had been. There are some specifics of some unique aircraft designs that require slight modifications or additions to this list, (such as the P-39 which requires an initial pro-spin series of inputs to stabilize the airflow over the control surfaces before the PARE method is used)

When inverted you must use caution to not look up at the ground to determine rotation, rather you must look over the nose. Looking up you may actually look beyond 90 degrees, which causes the illusion of rotation in the opposite direction, this is much easier to do accidentally in the real world, but it can happen in the sim too. And of course instead of pushing forward on the stick to lower the nose and break the stall you now must pull back to lower the angle of attack.

So to put it simply, if you are spinning to the right, power to idle, push and hold full left rudder, and push forward on teh eleavator control if upright, and pull the elevator control if inverted. You want to point the nose down to restore smooth airflow over the wings.

Things like in spin aileron, gear extension, and even power additions can be handy in those aircraft that don't have good spin character in the sim, such as the Ta152 but often these are unrealistic aspects of the sim FM.


EDIT: to clarify some points.

Waldo.Pepper
04-16-2005, 03:27 PM
"Bail out you bed wetter!"

Whomever can tell me who said that in 1940 gets a cookie.

Tully__
04-16-2005, 07:40 PM
If it's an inverted spin, wouldn't you want to pull back with the elevator?

TX-EcoDragon
04-16-2005, 11:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tully__:
If it's an inverted spin, wouldn't you want to pull back with the elevator? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep! You usually dont want to go too far beyond neutral though.

darkhorizon11
04-17-2005, 12:45 AM
Oops, yeah pull back my b.

Bremspropeller
04-17-2005, 01:41 PM
I've seen a Luftwaffe training-film in which was said, that putting aileron into the direction of the spin (and of course kicking opposite rudder) fastened the recovery.

Also the impact of torque onto the yaw-stability in a spin was mentioned.
Depending on the spin-direction and the direction of prop-rotation, closing or opening the trottle could help recovering the spin.

TX-EcoDragon
04-17-2005, 06:17 PM
In spin aileron has the effect of adding drag to the outboard wing, which slows the rotation about the yaw axis, in an aircraft with poor rudder authority in the spin it can be handy. The trouble arises when the wrong input is made, as if often the case if a panicked pilot attempts to stop to rolling with aileron, so in modern training students are generally taught to leave aileron alone simply to prevent aggravating the spin further. Some aircraft will do unexpected things from the usually tame in-spin aileron, such as a crossover spin. I had a perfectly normal, and weight and balanced Pitts S2A do this to me even though the type isn't known for it. If I were at 1000 feet instead of 7,000 this spin would have killed me. . . so I have no doubts about what stance I take on this issue! A small amount of in-spin aileron probably can be used as a tool to lessen the rotation rate if normal inputs fail to work, but in the real world I am not going to endorse it's use as a matter of practice because the risks and unpredictability of doing it far outweigh any potential benefits.

As far as the effects of power on the spin, yes, spin dynamics to the left and right are often very different, and the rotation of the power plant can counter the rolling tendency of the aircraft, in particular in aircract that have minimal rudder authority when spinning against the rotation of the engine however the main effect of the engine's rotation is that of gyroscopic precession of the prop. Because of this a spin to the right (if engine rotates CW from pilot's view) will be faster and more nose low than one to the left which has a nose up pitching tendency from the gyroscopic effects of the prop. This spin to the right will also be more flat spin resitant, and generally quicker to recover. Despite this, adding power very much at all in even low powered aircraft will generally aggravate the spin and make any transitions that it does rather violent, if the transition is to a flat spin the opposite way it may prevent recovery altogether. And consider that in an inadvertent spin outside of the traffic pattern that power is often elevated such the the spin will favor the left unless pilot inputs direct it elsewhere. The secondary stall and spin is also very common, and this is another time that you may not want much power in, even after the spin has stopped. Some aircraft with a very forward CG will fly out of the spin in a steep and fast spiral, with power addition even if all pro-spin inputs are left in, but with a mid range, or rearward CG the spin will go flat. At that point you can do ANYHTING with all other control surfaces and the spin will NOT recover unless one of the things you do is set power to idle.

Not to paint the Pitts in a negative light, but I know of an experienced Pitts pilot who found himself unable to recover from a spin after it went flat accidentally, he went down the list again and be certain that all steps were executed, in his case the throttle cable had broken, and he was at a higher than idle power setting even though the engine note was close enough to idle that he didn't notice anything out of the ordinary. He was thinking it was time to bail, but pulled the mixture (shut down the engine) and then was able to recover. In an aircraft with a known aft CG issue under certain approved loadings (such as the P-51) the tendency to go flat with power on is very stong, leaving power in for any lentgh of time is going to take you there fast. If you are spinning in the direction opposite the torque effect then chances are good you wont find yourself in an unrecoverable spin that has anything to do with torque/gyroscoppic effects since power is most probably elevated already, and as such, it will be of no use, spining the other way, well, just like before, you better get that throttle to idle because in most cases, the nose will lift towards the flat spin attitude.

This is why the P.A.R.E. method or what is also known as the NASA standard method are almost always the best way to recover. Test pilots flying aircraft of unknown behaviours know all sorts of tricks, but the NASA standard method is still the base of all of them. Sure, various aircraft types do have some unique traits, and when loaded outside designed limits, or at the extreme ends of design limits some modifications of basic technique can be a benefit, but the pilots skilled enough to use them properly are equipped to make that choice, newer pilots to the aircraft probably should not make a habit out of experimentation unless they are comfortable with all the possible, and probable results.


EDIT:

http://www.fcitraining.com/clips/aggravatedspin_ram_hispeed.ram

Here is an insteresting video clip showing what various control inputs do to an Extra 300L in a left spin ( the extra has a wood and composite prop so it spins very flat to the right as well as to the left). It also demonstrates why the order of operations is critical in the real world.


More here: http://www.fcitraining.com/video.htm

Atomic_Marten
04-17-2005, 09:10 PM
I'd say that it is a good chance that you get shot *before* you entered stall.
If that's the case, in 90% of cases, no recovery for you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

If your aircraft is undamaged you should exit stall fairly easy with all aircraft if there's enough alt left and assuming you aren't driving Ta152 (I'd say that I have crashed a lot because of flat TA152 spin http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) or P39 -- they are somewhat harder to recover, TA more than P39.

But I must admit, that you gave me an idea; I have *NEVER* experienced that yet -- will try in QMB http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif. Unrecoverable inverted flat spin (undamaged).

Atomic_Marten
04-17-2005, 09:17 PM
Do you by any chance have some pics of the event?

Aero_Shodanjo
04-18-2005, 12:57 AM
1st. Do as the manual says: Aileron neutral, full rudder opposite to the dirction of the spin, etc etc.

2nd. If that fails, bail out while you still got the altitude and the chance.

3rd. If, somehow, the canopy stuck and wont open...

Pray, hit escape and refly.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

VFA195-MaxPower
04-18-2005, 02:58 AM
Just thinking about it, I would have guessed that an increase in power would increase the airflow over your rudder (depending on the aircraft but certainly not the beaufighter) and cause a corresponding increase in rudder authority..

I guess not?

ploughman
04-18-2005, 08:01 AM
I found this on an aerobatics site. It tells you how to get into, and then out of an inverted flat spin. I haven't tried it in game yet.

"Inverted flat spin
From inverted flight stall the airplane. Apply full rudder at the stall.
The nose indicates spin direction. Things are moving and sliding. To flatten the spin, apply full aileron in the same direction as the rudder and apply full power.

To recover from an inverted spin use opposite rudder and hold yoke back. It is possible to recover from a spin with full opposite aileron. It is also possible to recovery by putting your hands over your head. It takes four full turns so have plenty of altitude."

I'm not sure what he means by the sublimely surreal "it is also possible to recovery by putting your hands over your head."

TX-EcoDragon
04-18-2005, 02:22 PM
MaxPower, vertical stab and rudder shielding are certainly issues in some aircraft, that is why an inverted spin will recover faster than an upright, but the main source of shielding is from the horizontal stabilizer and the elevator surfaces (or flaps if they are deployed). The propwash doesn't seem to make it to the tail group when spinning, at least not enough to increase control authority.

Consider the intentional flat spin. To enter a upright flat spin to the left: initiate a conventional spin by setting power to idle and slowing towards the 1G stall speed, at the stall break, briskly kick full left and bring the elevator fully aft against the stop, ailerons should be neutral, let the spin transition through the incipient phase which usually takes about 1 turn in this situation, into the developed (stable) phase, at this point you are in a conventional spin to the left, to make it go flat you will simultaneously move the stick fully to the right (keeping it fully aft against the stop) and add in full power, as you add in power the nose lifts, the rotation slows and the roll decreases. Now with the stick in the bottom right corner, full left rudder and power at max (or high value) you are in a flat spin. To accelerate the flat spin a competition pilot will then move the elevator fully forward while still holding it fully against the stops on the right side. This decreases the area of the rudder that is shielded from the airflow by the elevator surfaces. . . but most of this airflow is rising from below the aircraft, and you can see that if the propwash had any significant effect on tail group control authority while in a spin that the flat spin dynamic would be different, instead of the rotation rate decreasing, it would increase with added power, and while I can't convince you of this by saying it, trying it will convince you, once in the flat spin with full power the stick and rudder can be moved around and recovery is impossible. . . if for example you have this upright flat spin to the left going, and you kick right rudder with the stick fully forward that aircraft will abruptly transition from an upright flat spin to the left to and inverted flat spin to the right, even though you are using the inputs that many pilots think will result in a recovery. . .why?? Power.



Ploughman, the thing about putting your hands over your head is much like the Beggs-Mueller Pitts recovery technique developed to avoid aggravating the spin dynamics of what can sometimes be rather surprising aircraft (in fact my in spin aileron cross-over/transition spin in the Pitts was in the very aircraft that Gene Beggs used to own). Wayne Handley has thousands (proabbly hundreds of thousands)of spins in his logbook and multiple spin records and when you talk to him about spin recovery he says that in anything he has ever flown pilot hands on the stick can only do one of three things, prevent recovery, slow it, or mimic it. He feels it's all about the power and rudder, the stick does it's own set of gyrations and motions in the spin that are rather predictable, and he feels that the quickest spin recovery is either mimicking this motion with your hand, or simply letting go of the stick. Keep in mind this is material aimed at competition aerobatic and airshow pilots, not simply trainees. . . who are expected to do something silly with the stick.

Now, another spin expert with thousands of spins in his logbook is the Emergency Maneuver Training creator and cheif instructor who uses the PARE method, even in his Pitts, is Rich Stowell. His intention is to be certain the the student gets the PARE drill down, along with recognition of the direction and orientation of the spin, and then execute that PARE checklist. Letting go of the stick serves only to give it room to do it's own thing, this is OK if things are OK with the aircraft, but if there is any sort of damage, non-standard laoding, or that sort of thing then why waste time you may not have finding that out in the spin. . . recover!

In the end, you have to have the experience, and discipline to find what works best in every single aircraft you fly, but the changes between them will generally be very subtle, and only matter when you are doing things to competition standards, if that isn't your goal, then it is about safety, and the PARE method and Beggs-Mueller method are the safest ways to go. . . and I would give the nod to the PARE technique as it acts like a checklist so if anything does happen to be amiss (like a broken aileron spade on an aerobatic aircraft which will REQUIRE the pilot moves the aileron to neutral)

The overall purpose is the same for each group though. . recover quick, and don't aggravate the spin by messing with the stick. Personally I am of the camp that keeps my hand on the stick, but I do agree that mimicing the stick's natural motions in the recovery has the quickest recovery. . . I like to start and stop spins in sections by taking a conventional spin, then making it a flat spin, then making it an accelerated flat spin, and I stop them the same way, accelerated flat spin to a flat spin, to a conventional spin to recovery, with practice and attention to teh particular aircraft you can see the maximal rate at which this can be done, and if you mimic this in your recovery you can nail those exit headings from competition spins (usually one and half, one and a quarter, or one turn spins which must start and end exactly on headings) in this way I usually start my competition spin recoveries about 1/8 turn away from my desired exit heading instead of the 1/4 that is commonly used and what I used to use when I did it a little bit more "by the book". This makes for great looking crisp spins with very little perceptible transition. That said, you can NOT rush the recovery or you may get that crossover spin, or even a knife edge spin to deal with. . . and that is why it may be better to just let go in many aircraft, give the stick room, set power at idle and go to full opposite rudder. . . but remember that POH, some aircraft with peculiar shielding character, out of limits CG, or damage (etc) may NEED the stick in a particular spot to recover.



EDIT: forgot to complete a (run-on) sentence!

ploughman
04-19-2005, 01:36 AM
Thanks TX-Eco, I sort of thought he meant "don't touch nothing." I'll give it a go right this very minute. Lots of good advice, I take it you do this sort of thing in real reality?

darkhorizon11
04-19-2005, 12:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ploughman:
I found this on an aerobatics site. It tells you how to get into, and then out of an inverted flat spin. I haven't tried it in game yet.

"Inverted flat spin
From inverted flight stall the airplane. Apply full rudder at the stall.
The nose indicates spin direction. Things are moving and sliding. To flatten the spin, apply full aileron in the same direction as the rudder and apply full power.

To recover from an inverted spin use opposite rudder and hold yoke back. It is possible to recover from a spin with full opposite aileron. It is also possible to recovery by putting your hands over your head. It takes four full turns so have plenty of altitude."

I'm not sure what he means by the sublimely surreal "it is also possible to recovery by putting your hands over your head." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have experience here so I'll field this one.

That pretty much says it all Plough.

As for the the hands comment. A spinning aircraft is very sensitive, and the way the plane spins is reflected by its stability, controllability and its CG as this determines the spin axis. This can be found by using advanced calculus and factoring the moments into differiential equations...blah blah blah

In layman's terms a major factoring a spin aircraft is the center of gravity. Even minute changes in CG such as moving your seat forward or in this case your arms can really effect the way the aircraft maneuvers and spins. Moving the CG further forward makes it easier to recover from a spin while moving it back makes it harder. Rudder is critical in recovery but aileron and throttle positions are also vital. I won't get into how and why just because I don't want to write a book. In an inverted spin moving the CG forward does the same thing but moving your arms up makes it move further downwards on the vertical axis also.

A major contributing factor is the weight your shifting compared to the weight of the rest of the aircraft. Moving your seat around or your arms in a spinning aircraft that weighs 30,000lbs. won't really do to much since your arms weigh 20lbs if your lucky. On the other hand if your spinning in a senstive aircraft that only wieghs 1500lbs., well then you have a chance.

I read a story once of a student on his CFI ride with the FAA doing spin training. They spun the plane and the student couldn't recover. The FAA instructor tried with no luck either. Running out of time the instructor had an idea before bailing. He unlatched the seatbelts and told the student to jump forward onto the dash and leaned up against the windscreen (he also did this). The change in CG location was enough to break the spin and recover possibily saving their lives and definitely saving the aircraft.

I hope that clears up some uncertainty. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

ploughman
04-19-2005, 01:12 PM
Ah, now I get it, (shakes head in astonishment at own boneheadishness). A super agile, super light little stunt plane is going to react to actual physical movements made by the pilot even if they're not control inputs. But a whopping great fighter is not, even in real life, and besides Il 2 FB doesn't model players flinging their arms over their heads.

Doh!

Thanks.

TX-EcoDragon
04-19-2005, 01:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ploughman:
Thanks TX-Eco, I sort of thought he meant "don't touch nothing." I'll give it a go right this very minute. Lots of good advice, I take it you do this sort of thing in real reality? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's correct on both accounts Ploughman

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ploughman:
Ah, now I get it, (shakes head in astonishment at own boneheadishness). A super agile, super light little stunt plane is going to react to actual physical movements made by the pilot even if they're not control inputs. But a whopping great fighter is not, even in real life, and besides Il 2 FB doesn't model players flinging their arms over their heads.

Doh!

Thanks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



Ahhh. . . well, the story about the CG shift recovery in the isntructional spin is true, this happened in a Piper Tomahawk which is a type of traning aircraft that was more or less rushed through spin certification to the then new CAR 23 standards without complete and proper spin testing. This aircraft has very little shift in CG with loading because the passengers and fuel tanks are very near the CG so few would expect to find and aft CG in such an aircraft, but at a particular range, and with it's particular design, it may enter an otherwise unrecoverable spin. It has a T-Tail design and other characteristics that conspired to give it potential shielding problems with respect to the control surfaces on the tail which are critical to spin recovery. If these surfaces are shielded in the spin, then the aircraft is now just a projectile, and if you can lower the nose with a CG shift, the sheilding will stop as the aircraft retruns to unstalled flight.



In general your arms are already outstretched forward, in particular in a spin recovery,and there is no room for them to go anywhere in light aerobatic aircraft. . . if you were doing the right control inputs, and those control surfaces aren't shielded, then you should have recovered without the need for a shift in CG.

One thing is for sure, remebering that a forward shift in CG *can* under the right conditions enable an otherwise impossible spin to recover can be a lifesaver, but in general reaching for the panel isn't going to effect much change on a spinning aircraft.

darkhorizon11
04-19-2005, 01:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ploughman:
Ah, now I get it, (shakes head in astonishment at own boneheadishness). A super agile, super light little stunt plane is going to react to actual physical movements made by the pilot even if they're not control inputs. But a whopping great fighter is not, even in real life, and besides Il 2 FB doesn't model players flinging their arms over their heads.

Doh!

Thanks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bingo. I always keep it simple.

The guy who wrote the checklist you posted was assuming you were flying a small light aerobatic plane like the Cap 10b's I flew. He wasn't refering the you in your 25,000lb. Jug!

darkhorizon11
04-19-2005, 02:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TX-EcoDragon:
One thing is for sure, remebering that a forward shift in CG *can* under the right conditions enable an otherwise impossible spin to recover can be a lifesaver, but in general reaching for the panel isn't going to effect much change on a spinning aircraft. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know about that. In a light aircraft it can make a HUGE difference. Its all about the moment from the CG. If there is decent room to crawl into above the dash it actually can have a notable effect on aircraft performance.

Look at it this way:

Moment= wieght x arm
(unit of measure for moments is pound inch)
(arm is the distance from the CG)

Note: I'm doing these calculations with reference to the CG of the BEW not the datum plane.

150lbs passenger sitting 10 inches aft of the CG gives you a Moment of 1500 pound inches.

Okay now look at this. Lets say the average moment of a standard gross weight of a fully loaded Mudry Cap 10b is about 1,650lbs. The total moment is about 190,000 pound inches. If you try to cram yourself forward as far as possible into the dash and you can move yourself to about an average of 25 inches forward. Both you and your flight instructor combined weigh about 360lbs.

Multiply 360 pounds x 25 inches = 9,000 pound inches

Thats about 5% of the total moment of the aircraft. Doesn't sound like much?

Well consider that the CG can't move the entire length of the aircraft but its movement is limited to a small distance ussually no more than 10 inches.

On the Cap 10b the wing chord (width) is 1.50 meters or almost 5.00 feet. The CG range is measured on the percentage of the chord of the behind the leading edge. Or another words, a 25% CG is 25% of 5 feet which means CG 1.25 feet behind the leading edge. The range of the CG on a Cap 10b is 18% to 30%. In inches thats 10.8 to 18.

Using the math I showed above you can calculate that pushing yourself up against the windscreen like that moves the CG forward 6 inches on this aircraft, the CG RANGE IS 7.2 INCHES TOTAL.


I know a lot of you guys will breeze through that but I just wanted to mathmatically show that spinning towards the ground and swearing in your P-39 your pretty much toast, but if your in a small acrobatic like a Cap 10b a last ditch jump towards the windscreen can save your life.

TX-EcoDragon
04-19-2005, 05:06 PM
First of all, I said reach. . .ie. . with arms, since that is the quoted hands over head suggestion that got this CG shift stuff started. That statement had nothing to do with CG shift (and should probably not be on a website without greater explanation). Just to repeat myself, *if* for whatever odd reason the aircraft control surfaces are shielded aerodynamically such that there is no way to restore smooth enough airflow over them to get a recovery, and you can't bail out, then you may as well look at things that might control the aircraft without the surfaces. . . ie CG shifts, configuration changes, maybe torque/gyro effects. . . but these things are last ditch attempts that you make if you can't bail, and can't restore smooth airflow over the surfaces in any other way.

If this where to happen it generally suggests an out of (weight and) balance aircraft or high polar moment of inertia (perhaps from ammo stores, or camera rigs on the wing tips or tail), perhaps a jammed/broken throttle cable, or incorrect recovery inputs. If you are in this situation and have ruled out improper recovery inputs or jammed throttle, and are in a spin at medium or lower altitudes in any aircraft that had a moderate to fast spin rotation (much unlike a Tomahawk) and have a chute, use it. . .bottom line. . . You will not be able to control the rudder, or tail group at all in this situation, and this is a very risky option to take since the chances are high that you will have a benefit from correct recovery inputs that is greater than a CG shift with no inputs. The chances are also very high that being a projectile in the cockpit when you only have seconds to egress the aircraft is a bad plan.

Have you ever practiced a bail out in an aircraft with a fast spin? Have you ever spun an aircraft with a fast spin? It can be a challenge to reach your finger to the panel with any accuracy at the centrifugal forces that many of these spins impart. . . and these are the types of spins that sheilding and auto-rotation become the greatest! You can calculate whatever weight shifts you want to prove a CG shift that nobody would debate but for kicks how about figureing out Gx (horizontal G) you feel in a spin like that, and imagine moving around with nothing to hang onto under that load, and more importantly, imagine the consequences slipping and being little more than a passive projectile in the cockpit. I have done many types of spins in many different aircraft including warbirds and in many spins the force pushing you back to the rear corner of the aircraft is strong enough to keep you back there if you start trying cockpit gymnastics. . . look at the accident stats of how many people tried to bail as indicated by ejected doors/canopy and released harnessed that where found in the back seat because they could get out he door or canopy! It's not easy to move about under these conditions. Oh and it should be mentioned that in most fighters and aerobatic aircraft, you can't do anything beyond lean forward at the hips anyway, there simply isn't room. It is that reason that I am not ignoring this post. If people actually think that they should do spin recovery by reaching for the instrument panel or releasing their harness and trying to climb on the panel then I hope the are hearing the other aspects of the spin recovery that are more appropriate. I doubt anyone in this forum is looking for spin training from us in this thread, but if they get themselves into a situation like this then the standard and correct inputs should be made, releasing the harness should be the last thing they do before bailing out (while hanging onto something) unless they don't have that option. If they can lean forward while executing the correct spin recovery steps. . . then what the heck, do it. If they use the proper aircraft (approved for spins) take proper pre-flight action (specific to this instance: weight and balance, verify control surface deflections, and look for anything loose that could jam the controls), and have GOOD spin training then the freak spin that won't recover is very unlikely, in particular when compared to the chance that they will aggravate the spin with a failure to use the steps of the standard recovery or fail to fully execute them at all and instead go for the CG shift method straight away.