ppl training on tailwheel

Well put Dan and I might add that any time you are flying a taildragger that uses the typical anti-servo elevator trim tab system - which would be Citabrias, Champs and Cessnas to name a few - but not Cubs - you need to be aware of the fact that as you trim out nose heaviness on approach you are effectively reducing the surface area of your elevator as it applies to pitch up commands the kind of commands you are going to need for that perfect 3-pointer :)
 
j1b3h0 said:
@ Silvaire - I learned to fly at a young age, too. It's not the same as learning when one is 40.
Click to expand...

Point taken Doug, makes sense but I still side with Mike in that this act of doing one wheel slaloms around the runway stripes is necessary for a forty year old guy to get checked out in a Citabria is a bit over the top.

Great advanced training exercises I'll admit and a lot of fun but seriously, in a couple of hours of this training who's really having all of the "fun" and who pays for the tires? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I probably didn't make it clear. I don't make my students land and slalom on one tire. just on two. And you're right, it eats tires. But tires are cheaper than airplanes.
 
One of the reasons insurance is so absurd is because of the safety record of minmally checked out tailwheel pilots. Guys like us - who learned to fly in them - owe it to or students to make sure they can really fly safely.

If a C-150 student can perform a half dozen decent landings, they're probably ready to solo. If you instruct in a tailwheel airplane, you oughta make darn sure the student is really ready. Nothing is more nerve-wracking than watching your solo tailwheel student botch a touch and go...Unless you know - you've seen him demonstrate, time and again - he knows what to do.

If it was your airplane being flown by the inexperienced (tailwheel) pilot, are you okay with an abbreviated checkout?
 
The accident record hasn't changed that dramatically over the years, and certainly with less flying the overall number seems to have dropped. The insurance companies seem to be reacting more to the high price of repairs to a shrinking fleet than to the accident rate.
 
Dan Thomas said:
Exactly right. If you don't either release the stick's back pressure, or nudge it forward, the CG's downward inertia will pull the tail down, the wing's AoA will increase, and you get a bounce. The level-until-infinity thing sounds ok at first but it will take a LONG runway to afford such gentle contact and rollout as to avoid taking off again. Level means low AoA which means high speed. Wheel landing simply means tail off, and that might only be three or four inches off.

I used to be a flight instructor in Citabrias, Champs, Cessna 180 and 185. Wheel landings are preferred by the Cessnas when running light, since their CG is far forward, the horizontal stab is close to the ground, and trying to three-point it uses up all the elevator one has and ground effect on the stab still wants to keep the tail up. A wheel landing has to be done just right with that gear or you'll get a good bounce going and have to go around. Some operators, especially bush operators, will teach their pilots short-field techniques using wheel landings. Get the approach speed to minimum, flare very little and make contact, dump the flaps and get the tail well up to kill all lift and get the brakes on hard, using the elevator to keep the tail from rising any further. I have done these myself in all the taildraggers I've flown and it works well once one has the experience to be comfortable with it. I have landed the 185 and stopped it in under 300 feet.

I know of one outfit flying Helios that has the tail WAY up for weight on the mains, power on for elevator control and lots of brake. Can get stopped really short that way on marginal strips, and on such strips the Helio is easily able to get out again. Strip length is often less of a hassle than the tall trees that force touchdown well down the runway, and you'd better know how to stop quick.

In flying the airplane, which is anytime it is moving, we use ALL the controls to make the machine do what we want. And that includes the elevator in wheel landings.

Dan
Click to expand...

Dude.. using the horizon vs "put er' forward" for normal wheel landings, It's the same exact thing, just different way of teaching/saying it.

Were you talking about whats been called the MAF landing technique by the 185 crowd?

It will get your plane stopped quick, but if I ever caught one of my students doing it in one of our taildraggers, I'd kick his ass up and down that runway.. that's if the owner or A&P didnt beat me to it :lol:
 
NineThreeKilo said:
Were you talking about whats been called the MAF landing technique by the 185 crowd?

It will get your plane stopped quick, but if I ever caught one of my students doing it in one of our taildraggers, I'd kick his ass up and down that runway.. that's if the owner or A&P didnt beat me to it :lol:
Click to expand...

It's a JAARS technique. MAF no longer operates taildraggers, and when they did they were 180s and 185s. I believe they did use it; I learned it from a former MAF pilot.

Of course you'd go after a student that did that. It's not for the average student or PPL. Anyone doing it had better be a master of that airplane in every other way first, and be taught it by someone who's an expert in it.

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
It's a JAARS technique. MAF no longer operates taildraggers, and when they did they were 180s and 185s. I believe they did use it; I learned it from a former MAF pilot.

Of course you'd go after a student that did that. It's not for the average student or PPL. Anyone doing it had better be a master of that airplane in every other way first, and be taught it by someone who's an expert in it.

Dan
Click to expand...


It's not how hard it is for the pilot, its how hard it is on the equipment.
 
"Competing" Missionary pilot organizations flying heavily in the bush in some of their operating areas. (They'd not describe any religious work done as competition, and they do help each other out, it's just the only convenient secular word that gives the correct idea.)

JAARS - Jungle Aviation and Radio Service, they've dropped the longer name and just go by the acronym today and their focus has changed significantly to include IT and various other things as technology has changed.

MAF - Mission Aviation Fellowship. Ditto.

I visited MAF's training facilities in both Elizabethton, TN (associated with Moody Bible Institute in Chicago) and later in Ontario, CA long long long ago.

It was a significant personal interest back then.

MAF moved to Idaho a loooooong time ago.

Both organizations have increased knowledge of severe backcountry aviation and how to modify aircraft for crash survivability over the years, etc. Even long ago and far away when I busted the MAF A&P training location in TN, commissioning a new aircraft for off pavement backcountry flight was virtually a complete rebuild. Crashworthiness was serious business with them.

Back then, anyway... All pilots were required to also be qualified A&P holders and preference was given to pilots who'd attended their customized school.

I believe JAARS Cessna 206 was one of the aircraft flipped at Sun 'N' Fun a couple years ago in the tornado event. I remember recognizing their logo on the tail.
 
NineThreeKilo said:
It's not how hard it is for the pilot, its how hard it is on the equipment.
Click to expand...

Now, how can it be hard on the equipment? Running off the end of a short runway is a lot harder on it than raising the tail to kill lift and get weight on the mains for braking. I'm a mechanic as well as a CPL and former flight instructor, and the technique does no damage. I do see lots of other techniques that do damage, like trying to three-point a short-field landing and using so much brake as to flat-spot the tires. THAT I don't like. Or the pilot being so timid with the controls that he loses control of the airplane and runs into the rhubarb or groundloops it.

I taught my students to fly with verve. They didn't know the meaning of that good word, of course. Some of them have vocabularies that consist of various forms of "like.":wink2:

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
Now, how can it be hard on the equipment? Running off the end of a short runway is a lot harder on it than raising the tail to kill lift and get weight on the mains for braking. I'm a mechanic as well as a CPL and former flight instructor, and the technique does no damage.....

Dan
Click to expand...

As a tailwheel pilot, tailwheel plane owner, tail wheel instructor, AG and backcountry kinda guy the MAF landing has is time and place, but I wouldnt be happy seeing people do it just to do it.

For one your breaking HEAVY, for true back-country stuff it's necessary, however I get a chuckle when I see a dentist/lawyer/whatever in a carbon cub cook his breaks trying to play "wild alaska" on a 5000+ muni strip.

This what you are talking about

"At 1 mile out you should be at 60 knots IAS (depending on wind conditions), 500 feet above the
runway and descending at 500 FPM carrying about 13"-14" MP with
full flaps. Trimmed to hands off. The aircraft should come over the
threshold almost level. Do not flair and do not pull your power until you
'feel' the wheels touch (resist the temptation). This has to be learned
because your natural instinct is always to pull power. Almost
simultaneously when you pull power at wheel contact, come on with as
much brakes as you need and hold neutral yoke. The torque from
braking will help keep the tail up. Then as the speed is reduced and the
tail settles come back with the yoke. Power controls rate of descent, if
you reduce your power your descent rate will increase (even at 2'), then you'll have to flair to compensate and you'll be chasing the airplane. You want as few changes to correct as possible. This technique takes out the guess work - if you're low add power, if high reduce. Never change attitude or trim, it's simple."
 
Last edited:
NineThreeKilo said:
This what you are talking about

"At 1 mile out you should be at 60 knots IAS (depending on wind conditions), 500 feet above the
runway and descending at 500 FPM carrying about 13"-14" MP with
full flaps. Trimmed to hands off. The aircraft should come over the
threshold almost level. Do not flair and do not pull your power until you
'feel' the wheels touch (resist the temptation). This has to be learned
because your natural instinct is always to pull power. Almost
simultaneously when you pull power at wheel contact, come on with as
much brakes as you need and hold neutral yoke. The torque from
braking will help keep the tail up. Then as the speed is reduced and the
tail settles come back with the yoke. Power controls rate of descent, if
you reduce your power your descent rate will increase (even at 2'), then you'll have to flair to compensate and you'll be chasing the airplane. You want as few changes to correct as possible. This technique takes out the guess work - if you're low add power, if high reduce. Never change attitude or trim, it's simple."
Click to expand...

Nope. That's not it. I flare. Failing to flare will bounce the airplane. And changing power without changing attitude will change airspeed, an undesirable thing on approach.

I don't know whose technique that is, but it doesn't sound good.

Dan
 
That technique is certainly used with great success for short strips in bush all over the world. However, the guys who use it frequently also know that there's always some associated damage and wear and tear that occurs.

The brakes take a beating, the prop gets nicked (or gouged), and whatever is slung by the prop hits the belly and or the bottom of the horizontals. if you get the chance, take a look at the prop and the bottom of a working Super Cub sometime.

Nobody who is trying to master basic tailwheel landing technique has any business even attempting it. I have a friend of mine that had a couple of J-3s for rent until he caught one of his CFIs running full power, brakes on to bring the tail up simply because "it was fun".

Nobody who has to maintain an airplane would use that technique without a specific reason for doing so.

Notice I said anyone who had to work on the plane, not throw money at a mechanic to fix it.

Mike-
 
I have a similar article in a file somewhere. It includes an intermediate step that is omitted in the version published here, where the pilot is advised to add sufficient power to reduce the sink rate to less than 100 FPM prior to touchdown. Neither does it include the braking and tail up stuff, which IMO is totally unnecessary with potential results akin to D. K. Royal's (RIP) admonitions re. throwing the football.

Dan Thomas said:
Nope. That's not it. I flare. Failing to flare will bounce the airplane. And changing power without changing attitude will change airspeed, an undesirable thing on approach.

I don't know whose technique that is, but it doesn't sound good.

Dan
Click to expand...
 
stearmann4 said:
The brakes take a beating, the prop gets nicked (or gouged), and whatever is slung by the prop hits the belly and or the bottom of the horizontals. if you get the chance, take a look at the prop and the bottom of a working Super Cub sometime.
Click to expand...

In the landing the prop isn't picking up garbage. If it's getting beat up it's either because someone has contacted the surface with it, or he's getting the tail high early in the takeoff roll so that the prop is sucking up stones. There's no reason to do that.

A Super Cub's belly will get beat up the same as any other airplane that's working off gravel; the prop blast and the tires will both kick up rocks and junk. A trike is actually worse, with the prop tips already close to the surface and the nosewheel picking up stuff.

I wasn't promoting the tail-high braking technique as a common technique; I was responding to a claim by another poster that you'd NEVER nudge the elevator forward after a two-point touchdown. There are situations that most of us never have to deal with that require such techniques, and the guys are specially trained for them. It's either learn it, or never go into those places at all.

Dan
 
I have the 3" extended gear and 8.50 tires on my Cub. The prop is so high it does not pick up gravel but the tires sure throw a bunch around. Most of the nicks are in line with the tires. Don
 
stearmann4 said:
The brakes take a beating, the prop gets nicked (or gouged), and whatever is slung by the prop hits the belly and or the bottom of the horizontals. if you get the chance, take a look at the prop and the bottom of a working Super Cub sometime.
Click to expand...

Same damage as doing a tail up takeoff, right? :) Power is up, tail is up, same diff.
 
In the TV series Flying Wild Alaska there are numerous shots of Tweeto landing his 180 on tundra and gravel bars. With the big tires he seems to almost always land tail low, but kept off the ground, and a pretty good descent rate that sometimes causes him to get a gear bounce - meaning from the spring gear rather than an aerodynamic bounce as is usually discussed with wheel landings.

So do you guys think this is similar or identical to the MAF/JAARS stuff you have been talking about?
 
I haven't seen that particular show, but the low pressure in the big tires helps soften the touchdown on unimproved spots. In my 180 tail-low wheelies seem to tolerate a higher vertical speed/flare technique than the normal level-attitude wheelies that work better if the mains "feel for the ground."


Silvaire said:
In the TV series Flying Wild Alaska there are numerous shots of Tweeto landing his 180 on tundra and gravel bars. With the big tires he seems to almost always land tail low, but kept off the ground, and a pretty good descent rate that sometimes causes him to get a gear bounce - meaning from the spring gear rather than an aerodynamic bounce as is usually discussed with wheel landings.

So do you guys think this is similar or identical to the MAF/JAARS stuff you have been talking about?
Click to expand...
 
This thread has gotten so far misconstrued from the fly to the infinity point to the MAF heavy break landing to tail low two pts.

I'm just going to step out of this thing, too many weekend warrior folks chiming in and too much miscommunication. When folks start talking about how many fps they touch down at... that aint tailwheel, tailwheel is not paint by numbers, dont know how else to say it.
 
Heh heh... "I found weekend warriors talking on a web board!" Oh no! ;)

Did anyone ever answer the OPs question? LOL!

Here, I can help...

"Find an instructor who'll figure out how to make you do it. You won't find a single answer here that fixes individual technique problems. This is the Internet. You learn to fly airplanes in the airplanes."

:)

Everybody happy now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top