Tail wheel

brien23

brien23

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,440
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name
Display name:
Brien
Lots of bent tail wheel aircraft, another at KBVS. Is it the training that is at fault, the blind leading the blind or what. Seems like the number of bent tail wheel aircraft are on the rise why?
 
brien23 said:
Lots of bent tail wheel aircraft, another at KBVS. Is it the training that is at fault, the blind leading the blind or what. Seems like the number of bent tail wheel aircraft are on the rise why?
Click to expand...
There was a reason they invented a nose wheel.
 
brien23 said:
Lots of bent tail wheel aircraft, another at KBVS. Is it the training that is at fault, the blind leading the blind or what. Seems like the number of bent tail wheel aircraft are on the rise why?
Click to expand...

For decades now most people learn on tricycle gear and then try to transition.

Taildraggers are much less tolerant of sloppy flying, such as consistently flying the final approach at too high speed, something I seem to observe a lot more of these days (are instructors scaring their students with tales of low altitude stall/spin?). Just one example, and one can get away with that in many tricycle gear aircraft (maybe not in a Mooney :p ) at the expense of the tires and brakes, but in a conventional gear airplane coming across the fence with too much energy is just asking for trouble.

I wish I had learned on a tailwheel. Back in 1974 there were two FTUs on the field I trained at. One had some sort of ancient rag and tube tailwheel aircraft and the other was the Cessna Pilot Center with nice looking 150s. This teenager went for the "modern" option. Now late in life I am trying to learn to be proficient, really proficient at handling a tailwheel plane. It is a ton of fun, but demanding.
 
Last edited:
I also notice a trend towards "I have a tailwheel endorsement, so I'm qualified to fly any taildragger" mentality. Just because you have the endorsement and 8 hours in a Citabria doesn't mean you can hop in an Extra, Pitts, T6 and be okay.
 
I’ve found many Tailwheel instructors arnt that experienced, stuff like “stick forward” vs “fly to the horizon” and that “happy feet” nonsense.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
I also notice a trend towards "I have a tailwheel endorsement, so I'm qualified to fly any taildragger" mentality. Just because you have the endorsement and 8 hours in a Citabria doesn't mean you can hop in an Extra, Pitts, T6 and be okay.
Click to expand...

+1

Geez, there are days I wonder if I should have started on something more docile than the Husky. :D
I've come close to letting it bite me a couple of times already.
 
GRG55 said:
For decades now most people learn on tricycle gear and then try to transition.

Taildraggers are much less tolerant of sloppy flying, such as consistently flying the final approach at too high speed, something I seem to observe a lot more of these days (are instructors scaring their students with tales of low altitude stall/spin?). Just one example, and one can get away with that in many tricycle gear aircraft (maybe not in a Mooney :p ) at the expense of the tires and brakes, but in a conventional gear airplane coming across the fence with too much energy is just asking for trouble.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's similar to a younger person trying to drive on the ice with an older vehicle that doesn't have all the idiot-proofing: ABS, stability augmentation (or whatever they call it) and traction controls.

When I was an instructor in taldraggers we taught bounce and swerve recoveries. We'd get the airplane rolling down the runway and the instructor would suddenly push some rudder so that the airplane headed for the rhubarb. "Fix it!" we'd tell the student. After a dozen of those they were getting much better with their feet. They learned to anticipate the swerve sooner, and how to keep from overcorrecting. In the landing we'd take control and make the airplane bounce, and they'd have to fix that too. Sometimes we'd get them rolling along, tail up, stick to one side and one main wheel on the ground. Hold that, we'd say. You really learn to use all the controls that way, throttle included, and it's good prep for crosswinds.
 
The problem isn't with being too high or too fast on approach in something with a tailwheel. The problem is not knowing how to safely bleed off your energy.
 
James331 said:
I’ve found many Tailwheel instructors arnt that experienced, stuff like “stick forward” vs “fly to the horizon” and that “happy feet” nonsense.
Click to expand...
...and a lot of the experienced guys don't have the time or inclination.

I tried hanging my shingle out as a tailwheel instructor for a while...your airplane, I'll teach you kind of thing.

The expectation seems to be, "give me the absolute minimum I can get by with." 10 hours for an endorsement? “Bob” says he’ll do it in 3-5. 2 hours ground, 2 hours flight for a flight review? I haven’t spent any time with an instructor since we “talked about stuff on the sectional and then flew for an hour” two years ago, but “the FAA says it should only be two hours total.”

Pretty much everyone I worked with thought the time was well worth it, but with scheduling issues at my real job, it just wasn’t worth the hassle.
 
MauleSkinner said:
...and a lot of the experienced guys don't have the time or inclination.

I tried hanging my shingle out as a tailwheel instructor for a while...your airplane, I'll teach you kind of thing.

The expectation seems to be, "give me the absolute minimum I can get by with." 10 hours for an endorsement? “Bob” says he’ll do it in 3-5. 2 hours ground, 2 hours flight for a flight review? I haven’t spent any time with an instructor since we “talked about stuff on the sectional and then flew for an hour” two years ago, but “the FAA says it should only be two hours total.”

Pretty much everyone I worked with thought the time was well worth it, but with scheduling issues at my real job, it just wasn’t worth the hassle.
Click to expand...

Sounds about right.
 
If you get "behind" a tailwheel airplane you'll literally find yourself behind the tailwheel. ;)

Too many nose dragger pilots have gotten away with landing crooked. Can't do that with conventional gear. I blame instructors.
 
Tom-D said:
There was a reason they invented a nose wheel.
Click to expand...

Land-o-matic.jpg
 
As an experiment, I took one of my tough case students on a post solo flight in a C-140. He required a considerable amount of clever tricks and encouragement to figure out landing, but he finally struggled his way to proficiency and made three perfect landings and one go-around on his first solo in a C150.

Anyway, with nothing other than instructions to land it the same way he was taught in the 150, he made two three-point landings and had complete mastery of the 140.
He was so smooth and straight that he didn't need to make much heading correction after touchdown.
I showed him a crappy landing and recovery and a wheel landing and we had fun flying a "real" airplane.

He went on to join the Air Force...
 
FastEddieB said:
Land-o-matic.jpg
Click to expand...

And revolutionize GA it did. The military wised up to trikes long before. It makes sense that GA would catch up eventually. The "conventional", or "tail dragger" configuration has advantages in certain applications and this makes it a niche design these days, but for the vast majority of flying, it's a liability.
 
I soloed in a C140 and later in a Swift. 600 hours instructing in PA-11's. My close to 900 hours of tail time has made me a better pilot.
 
ain't often I get to brag, skip ahead to about 4.40 unless you like viewing the Puget sound.

 
Plano Pilot said:
I soloed in a C140 and later in a Swift. 600 hours instructing in PA-11's. My close to 900 hours of tail time has made me a better pilot.
Click to expand...
There was people here before I got here :). I had well over 2000 hours T/W prior to my PPL exam 6-8k in beaver, nordland prior to entry in the military, then over 1000 in 170/180 after that, and now I won't go solo in any tailwheel due to proficiency.
Just because you did it once doesn't mean you can do it again.
 
IK04 said:
Anyway, with nothing other than instructions to land it the same way he was taught in the 150, he made two three-point landings and had complete mastery of the 140.
Click to expand...

The key is how “he was taught in the 150...”.

If a student, or even an accomplished pilot, was taught to land as slowly as possible - I.e. power off and stick nearly all the way back - 3-pointers in a taildragger should come pretty easily. They will have to learn to wake up their feet compared to a nosewheel plane, but that usually doesn’t take long.

Problem is, a lot of pilots tend to lose the knack of landing slowly, and get in the habit of faster touchdowns. In that case, it can be a struggle to get them to relearn slow landings. Still, the vast majority of my tailwheel transition students were ready to solo after my 5-hour transition course. Bear in mind much of the first hour was familiarization with the Citabria - it was often their first exposure to a stick and tandem seating and a lower panel than they were used to.
 
Tom-D said:
There was people here before I got here :). I had well over 2000 hours T/W prior to my PPL exam 6-8k in beaver, nordland prior to entry in the military, then over 1000 in 170/180 after that, and now I won't go solo in any tailwheel due to proficiency.
Just because you did it once doesn't mean you can do it again.
Click to expand...

My last time in a tailweel was around 9 months ago in a C140. My dad sold it a few months ago after deciding to quit flying at age 84. I admit only flying it twice a year or so I did not feel comfortable in even moderate crosswinds.
 
All taildraggers are the same just as all nose-draggers are the same.
 
RyanShort1 said:
Huskys ARE docile.
Click to expand...

Maybe compared to some others, but I am pretty sure the Husky has the highest power to weight ratio of any airplane I've ever owned.

The acceleration is fantastic, but if you start to lose the centreline in the 400 odd feet it takes to launch it things can go for $#!+ very quickly with even a minor overcorrection. Took me 4 or 5 take-offs to lighten up the touch on the rudder enough.
 
Back when men where men, and snow and up hill both ways, and kids today have it easy. I’m not as good as I once was, but I was as good once as I ever was.
 
I got it.
You need not take every post on this forum seriously. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top