Spin Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 SP you'll find most of us are capable of distinguishing a humourous touch....., don't stop, life is serious enough as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 In all these vids of TW incidents the pilots have had a nice big airfield, often sealed with wide grass verges, but they all try to do their x-wind landings on the centreline. In my view, there is nothing wrong in landing at an angle across the strip if conditions allow (and warrant it). On one particularly bad day arriving at Mildura from Broken Hill with a howling nor'-westerly behind me, I landed on the grass on the lee side, tracked across the bitumen, then continued onto the grass to windward in order to land safely. A very low stall (28 knots) helped considerably. I do however remember the refueller shaking his head when I pulled up at the bowser... kaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Taildraggers, sealed strips, and crosswinds are a known bad combination. Often all is well until the tailwheel touches, when things can change dramatically. In high winds always better on the grass if possible. My extra feelers always go up when landing on sealed strips regardless of the wind. Probabily 80% of my time is in taildraggers over the years. The experience is richer compared to training-equiped aircraft, and I can't remember the last time I got even close to groundlooping. I did do a couple of good ones earlier in my career though, and you really have to do one, to learn how not to do them !! Slowing down and touching down at the correct speed is the key. Every extra knot above can spell trouble......................Maj... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Major you can add max tyre pressure to that little list. Grass verge was oringinally kept as a landable area for tail skid aircraft. Kaz is right about landing at an angle and using what one needs to get the job done, Too many pilots are fixated on that long straight bit of black. If the wind is howling and it is over cross wind limits for you and the aircraft light is fast running out and you can't get to another airfield that is more on wind direction, would you land on a taxy way, a bit of grass into wind or risk rolloing the whole show into a ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomo Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 On the subject of using the whole runway... Depends what I'm in, but if there's crosswind from, say, the left, I take off on the left hand side of the runway. The main reason is to make use of the 'curve' of the runway (if it has one that is) to put the into wind wing down a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Think I'd stick to the middle. You cannot get the into wind wing down till you have a fair bit of speed up. Untill then you have to keep a lot of weight on the wheels to stop from being drifted off to the left( in your example). Very rarely have I heard mention of the need to make a clean break with the tarmac/field in a strong crosswind,to ensure that you do not contact the runway again after the initial lift off. This requires you to have the nose a bit lower than normal, ( watch out for prop clearance) and hold the plane in the runway a bit longer than usual, and make a clean rotation. You combine this with keeping a bit of into wind aileron and ease the downwind rudder to allow the plane to turn a little into wind and you are then in a position to maintain track on the runway extended centreline, crabbing into wind with wings levelled, as you climb out. You are meant to maintain the centreline till you make your turn, ( crosswind or onto a departure track). Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Student Pilot Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 You can put as much science and study in it as you like, the thing is you do what's necessary. Take off and land. Tailwheel, tricycle or skid, you just do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 You can be shown properly or you may find out the hard way. The best learning is when you UNDERSTAND what is happening. What to do and why it is done that way. Being ready for anything is a matter of experience and probably your attitude. TOO relaxed or be aware.. It's up to you.. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teckair Posted March 26, 2011 Author Share Posted March 26, 2011 You can put as much science and study in it as you like, the thing is you do what's necessary. Take off and land. Tailwheel, tricycle or skid, you just do it. What a good idea, Not!! I know of four people who thought that and went out and bought tail wheel aircraft and wrecked them, and several others who bought planes and gave up on them and sold them again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Student Pilot Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 I should have added "With training", you don't just buy one and go and fly anything. Do you just go and buy a helicopter and fly without training? What I am trying to say is you don't have to be an "Ace" to fly tailwheel aircraft. You don't need to tell everybody who will listen people who fly tailwheels are better than everybody else. It's just another aircraft with a new set of skills to learn, nothing more. I might add they are fun as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pioneer200 Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 I was lucky enough today to fly a 1953 auster aiglet. What a thrill, quite different to the trusty J160 and Pioneer 200 that I normally fly. Taxiing alone was difficult to start with until you realise you need more power to increase airflow over rudders to turn, or/and use heel brakes. Pushing stick forward on takeoff also felt a bit strange, but during flight it was a dream to fly. My 2 landings were fine, but it was a nil wind day, and I can only imagine they can be a handful with 10 knots and above of crosswind . One of my flying highlights for sure!!! Heres a link to plane I flew.......... http://www.edcoatescollection.com/ac2/NZBA/ZK-BCK.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Agreed, Student Pilot. And a lot of fun aeroplanes just happen to be taildraggers. However there are a small number of people who just don't seem capable of learning these skills well enough, either that or have trouble retaining them after flying tricycle gear aeroplanes for some time or don't have the discipline to apply them when appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Student Pilot Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 just had a look at your avatar student pilot, your flying a pacer! I love the old pipers, I nearly bought one from caboolture but couldn't come to a price, they are the coolest ole jiggers around!! Agreed [ATTACH]13383.vB[/ATTACH] I should also point out you can do this in a nosewheel as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Tailwheel is just different, it used to be called "Conventional". Any aircraft can bite if not handled correctly. The rubbish carried on by some about how you have to be a Special" pilot is just that, rubbish. It's just another thing to learn in a constant non stop learning curve. I mean how hard can it be, they let girls do it? Hello Student Pilot Yes TW is different. Yes, it still gets called "conventional" and No, you don't have to be a "special" pilot to fly one. And, it is about learning... training and practice. The need to keep current is somewhat greater than your usual tricycles which gained popularity in the 50's and 60's for the very reason that they are more stable and forgiving of bad practices. But that's about all we agree on. My licence lets me fly one and I've got that licence because I passed the test and keep on passing it every two years. "They" had nothing to do with it. Let me know when you have the endorsement and a couple of hundred hours or more and I'll think about welcoming you to the club Kaz (smiling too) kaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 <snip> ..... The Tiger didn't have any brakes and the Auster almost didn't.. Nev The Auster still hasn't! kaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Yes student pilot, the Pacer is one of my favorite pipers also. I once suggested to Howie Hughes that he must have one out back of the factory, to get measurements for the Lightwing....he went all funny. Same basic concept with the side-by -side seating etc. have you seen Bob Taits ?.....pretty as hell.........................................................Maj... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spin Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Oh dear, a case of PUI or just not reading previous posts:oh yeah: And for those not familiar with Bob Tait's steed, herewith photo taken at Watts Bridge - I'll second Maj, pretty as..... [ATTACH]13384.vB[/ATTACH] Maj, I can't speak for Howie Hughes and his measuring tape, but similar stories are told about BD Maule and his aircraft. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 I should also point out you can do this in a nosewheel as well. Yes, but TW's like mine and the PA20 were designed for their STOL performance and rough ground capability... they both lost the latter when they tried to copy Mr Cessna and installed those fragile nosewheels There is a nice PA22/20 at my home field and I'm sure a pilot of your talents could have a lot of fun if you upgraded your's to TW configuration kaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Oh dear, a case of PUI or ...... PUI? Is that like foot in the mouth disease?And I also agree that Bob's Pacer is beaut - a very useful aeroplane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Spin, There is no need to reinvent the wheel, when it's already been perfected. The performance of the Pacer, Maule, and even the Lightwing in the right hands is already well known. It's a good recipe that does what it does, very well indeed.................................................Maj... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocket1172 Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Kaz, you are a champion. Good comments. "Special" we are not. Seperately skilled we are. I don't hear of too many pilots cringing when asked to fly the three wheeled variety. Before I achieved my TW Endo, I admit I was scared after reading all the propagander! But determined I was, if I ever wanted to pursue my Ag career. Endorsements are training and there for a reason, because there are "special needs" that must be understood. Good to hear of things I was taught by the late Col Pay, being brought up in the thread. Taking 5 degrees of your approach path and landing with a bit of a diagonal, when the x-wind is winning the war, is something I have had to use plenty of times. When airstrip length is no problem, keep some speed, fly the aeroplane onto the ground and don't become a passenger to gravity alone. A good exercise we used to practice in the early hours of Ag, was fly along at cruise speed along the strip, gently lower down ever so slightly.........,(chirp!!) find the ground, and fly away. Second exercise, fly along the airstrip with one wheel on the ground all the way, then fly away. You ended up with great aileron control feel. And how many times has one landed the TW aircraft, only to be shot back up into the sky again? When learning in the C180/185 which is bad for bouncing, (which occurs from the change of AoA as the aircraft touches down), Col told me to always put 1 wheel down first, (which comes from the previous exercise I mentioned) and cut your bounce down considerably. Works like a shock absorber! Never did I land my TW on 2 wheels at once, unless it was a 3 pointer to pull up quick (rare on all our strips, unless is was to pull up, straight into the hangar for that nice beer at the end of the day!) A novel I know, but maybe of some help! Rod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Student Pilot Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Let me know when you have the endorsement and a couple of hundred hours or more and I'll think about welcoming you to the club Kaz (smiling too) I got a TW endorsement in 1979 and have been flying them for a living ever since. Yes, but TW's like mine and the PA20 were designed for their STOL performance and rough ground capability... they both lost the latter when they tried to copy Mr Cessna and installed those fragile nosewheels There is a nice PA22/20 at my home field and I'm sure a pilot of your talents could have a lot of fun if you upgraded your's to TW configuration kaz I'll disagree with your first statement, I would have no hesitation in taking a 182 into the same strips I would take a 180, the same with a Tripacer/Pacer. If you look at the stall speeds quoted by the factory the 182 has a slower stall speed than the same year model 180. With a Pacer or Pacer conversions the specs are the same as the Tri. As to your last statement if you have a look at the Pacer in the picture (Mine) you will see it is a converted Tripacer. If I had my time again I don't know if I would convert it to tailwheel, it's just the poor old Tripacer was soooooooooo ugly. I have seen Bob's machine very pretty, it performs well too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teckair Posted March 27, 2011 Author Share Posted March 27, 2011 Something just does not sound right here with SP, been flying tailwheel since 1979, but some how thinks nose wheelers are just as good as tailwheelers on beaches and rough strips, oh also no rego letters on the Pacer in the photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 I got a TW endorsement in 1979 and have been flying them for a living ever since. I didn't get mine until 1984 but I did have 15 years of gliding including powered gliders beforehand. I'm just a humble recreational flyer so my hours have been seriously limited by the expense. I acknowledge your claims to considerably greater experience and withdraw my now apparently gratuitous invitation. What do you do for a living? I'll disagree with your first statement, I would have no hesitation in taking a 182 into the same strips I would take a 180, the same with a Tripacer/Pacer. If you look at the stall speeds quoted by the factory the 182 has a slower stall speed than the same year model 180. With a Pacer or Pacer conversions the specs are the same as the Tri. I wasn't thinking about stall speeds per se. I was thinking about the strain on the nose gear - the load on the nose gear in soft/rough ground exacerbated by cog and load transfer under braking and the length of ground roll. Which year/models C180 and C182 were you referring to? As to your last statement if you have a look at the Pacer in the picture (Mine) you will see it is a converted Tripacer. If I had my time again I don't know if I would convert it to tailwheel, it's just the poor old Tripacer was soooooooooo ugly. Yes, it shared that aesthetic problem with the Beagle. kaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 The tri-pacer if a stumpy little creature. The Pacer is often a converted Triper. Think it costs around 24 grand to do it. Regarding rough/soft strips. The weight transfer is important, The mains throw the weight onto the nosewheel because of where they are in relation to the CofG, as well as the transfer due to braking, and there is a limit to how big a tyre you can fit, to the nosewheeel. Maintenance of the oleo is substantial on rocky strips due to the chrome being pitted and the seals destroyed.. Don't recall seeing many trike cropdusters. Are there any around? Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now