How does the ercoupe fly compared to a piper Cherokee 140? The 140 feels kind of loose and was wondering if the ercoupe flew better. Thank you
Hi. Typically 140s feel a little lose, but the Ercoupe can be a whole new experience, in the fact that, unless it is modified, has no rudder pedals, control is part of / linked to, the ailerons, but they are a Little more responsive, tighter. Again it depends on the rigging, alignment...
If you are talking about an Ercoupe with no rudders, you are in for a very interesting landing experience. After that Cherokee, landing in a crab will feel just wrong. Taxi will be weird - you steer on the ground with the yoke, like driving a small truck. Otherwise, for the most part, it's a transition to a brand new type. Different power, different airframe, different handling. Easy for some. Difficult for others. If you've already done a number of transitions it's easier than if you have done none or very few.
Ercoupe has a pretty small cockpit. My suggestion is to go sit in one at the very least before considering them.
I transitioned from a 172 to an Ercoupe. Biggest thing for me was going from a high wing to a low wing. As stated before, steering on the ground with the yoke takes some getting used to, as does not pressing your foot against a floorboard devoid of rudder pedals. Does more of a mush than a stall, ailerons are responsive enough. I found that I could never really trim the airplane for a hands off landing approach. Has a real thin little trim tab. Might have been just how my particular airplane was set up. Takeoff is a bit different, as you keep the nose wheel on the ground until you are ready to rotate and lift off in one motion, unlike my RV where I get the nose wheel off as soon as I have elevator authority. Landing is a piece of cake, once you get used to touching down in a crab. Ercoupes can actually handle quite a bit of crosswind. On my very first landing, I had no idea that I had touched down. I want to say that was all pilot skill, but I’ll credit the airplane with most of it. As stated before, the cockpit is a tad snug, kind of like having two people sit on the bow seat of a rowboat. I found that for me, the instrument panel is a bit close, so that the last bit of flair instead of using your arms, you need to use your wrists. Just my observation. Fun as all get out to fly with the windows down. Try making a turn by sticking your hand out. It’s a hoot. Bottom line..... it’s a fun little airplane.
I think that's common to the breed. All three Ercoupes I've flown had pretty ineffective trim. Fortunately, the control pressure aren't very high.
The only real difference would be a more "normal" looking crosswind landing. It's fun without. A few months ago, I got a call from an aircraft broker. Turns out a friend of mine sold his Ercoupe and the broker needed to transport it. Tons of experience in all sorts of aircraft but none in a Ercoupe. So my friend hired me to do a quick lesson so he could deliver it intact. Fortunately we had a decent crosswind that day. Not ridiculous but enough to give a good taste. We laughed so much I felt like Lew Dixon from YouTube.
I'm pretty sure you still can. The crabbed landing has nothing to do with the existence of rudder pedals. It's the heavy trailing-link main gear which allows the Ercoupe to land in a crab. The ruder pedals just avoid the necessity of doing it (might also help a bit with directional control on landing so you do't have to put the nose wheel down right away)
Very intersting concept they had, obviously it didnt catch on... but intersting none the less they made it work.. the no rudder peddles that is...
Cherokee 140s are...sl....sloppy? I scoff in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries.
The design went through a number of corporate entities and names. It was originally developed by a company called Engineering & Research Corporation (ERCO) as the Ercoupe (pronounced "Aircoupe"). Later the design was acquired by Forney (later "Fornaire") Aircraft Company, and it became the Fornaire Aircoupe. Most Forney/Fornaire Aircoupes were built with conventional three-axis controls. Then Air Products Corp. of Carlsbad NM acquired the design and built a couple dozen Aircoupes, before selling to Alon Corp., a company founded by two former Beech executives in 1964. Alon A-2 Aircoupes had a redesigned, aft-sliding canopy, and a modern instrument panel, and later a simplified spring steel main landing gear. Two-axis controls were a rarely-purcashed Alon option. Alon even had a pretty four-seat derivative in flight test, but in 1968 sold out to Mooney, which made several cosmetic changes in the Aircoupe (including a Mooney-style "backwards" single vertical tail) and called it the Mooney M10 Cadet. The Cadet, though, was not the first single-tail iteration of the design. In 1946 Aeronca built two prototypes of a modified Ercoupe under license from ERCO, one with a single tail, calling it the Aeronca 12AC Chum.
Whats the thoughts on why the whole no rudder peddle didn't catch on? Just because we are a stubborn group of ppl? The idea was to make flying more accessable to people correct? In terms of making it easier and more like the autos we are used to. Just curious why the concept of interconnecting it all didn't catch on and likely advance to be better and better if it worked pretty well... This discussion makes me want to go for a hop in one and check it out
Yes. I think there were some earlier ones, but a number of aviation historical sites indicate the Ercoupe was the first generally available civilian aircraft to have "unconventional" tricycle gear. If you search ercoupe first tricycle gear airplane on Google, yo will probably come up with a few references. Beats me. I suspect it was a combination of things. We're talking about a light sport qualified airplane with limited speed, power and capability. It's one thing to fly an 85 HP Ercoupe without being able to compensate for torque and P-factor; something else to do it in a 300 HP Cessna 210. The ability to "straighten itself out" upon landing in a crosswind might work well for something that light; perhaps not so much in something heavier without substantially increasing weight with even beefier main gear. The concept of interconnecting did catch on a bit. A number of singles, Mooneys and Bonanzas among them, interconnect aileron and rudder, but that's to counteract adverse aileron yaw in turns. Someone cam tell us if that was passed on to twins and jets. If you want to hop in one, check out your local EAA chapter. There are typically a few members who own one.
Hi. In my opinion it is not Just that it is / was different, is that that is Limited, in the sense that, in some cases, you may need both Crab and Slip to get the job done. It also is more difficult, for most pilots, to do a proper Crag, unless you stay current / practice more.
If you don't count such early types as the Curtiss Pusher, yes. Fred Weick started design of a lightplane in 1934, with emphasis on safety features including tri-gear. With many major changes Weick's concept evolved into the Ercoupe, which first flew in 1937. That same year Waco offered tri-gear on a large cabin biplane, but only a handful were built. Fred Weick, by the way, later joined Piper and collaborated in the design of the PA-28 Cherokee.
I was in a flying club that had an ercoupe, without rudder pedals. Then when the light sport rule came out a couple local guys bought them and I gave them their insurance required checkouts. One of them had rudder pedals. My experience was that, at landing speed, the rudders did not have enough authority to correct for any decent crosswind anyway. Remember, the rudders on the ercoupe are only sized to counteract adverse yaw and only one of them moves at a time. My student found nothing but frustration trying to correct for a crosswind on landing. After a while of that I suggested that we just land in a crab the way the airplane was designed to be flown. When we did that, a little light went off above my students head and he had no trouble flying the airplane then. IMO the rudder pedals are just a waste of weight with no benefit on an ercoupe. I used to love landing in crosswinds on our clubs 24 ft wide runway. It was a hoot.
This. I enjoy flying Ercouopes, but they are much tighter than a 140. If you are a modern sized adult, they are not two people airplanes
With pedals, if flies like a regular airplane, but with a lot less rudder authority. That’s why a stock Ercoupe can land in a higher x-wind.
The originals were called Ercoupe. When Alon bought the type certificate, they renamed it an Aircoupe and added the sliding canopy and rudder pedals
What's more fun than an Ercoupe? Two of em! Or taxi up next to your SR22 buddy and challenge him to a race from standing start to 1,000 feet ... How 'bout a four-seat 'Coupe? The Alon X-A4:
