What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

A Model vs Taildragger

JoeM

Active Member
I have been reading a lot of posts recently about damaging nose gears and flipovers with poor landing technique. It seems it takes as much skill for either conventional gear or a nosewheel aircraft. As I am a very new student pilot I would like to hear the pro's and con's of both. For me I would love to have a taildragger just because I think they look better.
 
I would consider getting my PPL and build a -7. I can only wish that Vans would offer a quicker building -9 (pulled rivets?) or a taildragger -12. There is also the Zodiac or Sonex but that's a different discussion.
 
To be honest, if you're in a hurry to fly, then building an RV isn't the best choice for you anyway, either mentally or financially. Used RV's are much cheaper than building new right now. And you won't be constantly frustrated that you have to keep building when you really want to be flying. If you can afford to finance a kit over the few years it'll take to build it, then you can afford to finance a (smaller) loan to buy a completed plane now.

Re: Tailwheel vs. Nosewheel, I suggest you do a search of the forums for other threads expounding the pros and cons. There are many. What it comes down to is, once you're off the ground, the plane flies the same. I don't find the RV's to be challenging taildraggers to handle on the ground. The -A models have better ground visibility, but some people have trouble with them flipping on their back for reasons that I don't think are fully understood yet.
 
Pros and cons

It does not seem that anyone has actually answered your question. Simply put you need to adopt the same procedure for both nosewheel and taildraggers, that is get the nose up when putting it on the ground.

This will give you a three point landing in a taildragger, and will prevent damage to a nose gear........ then when your rolling out bring the stick back into your gut and keep it there. Done forget the new mod by Nosejob, which should eliminate most flip overs to nosegears.

The difference is that the nosegear is easier to keep straight on the roll out, you have to use your feet more with a taildragger and you have to maintain this extra input throughout taxiing. But its fun.

Pros Nose gear is easier on roll out. Possibly a better cross wind capability.
Tailgear a little faster, a little lighter.

Cons. Reverse the above. The RV 9A is difficult to push backwards almost impossible single handed on grass. Whereas you can pick up the tail of an RV4 and pull it backwards more easily which is a factor sometimes when getting back in the hangar......... well for us anyway.

Only you can decide which looks best for you if this is a factor.

Personally I like taildraggers even though I have a nosewheel RV9. They are a bit more challenging and in my view better looking.
 
Joe,

Both models are fine airplanes. Having flown my 9B as both a nosewheel airplane (335 hours) and taildragger (101 hours), I really like the tailwheel configuration for my mission, and personally prefer the looks. When I was first building, I had virtually no tailwheel time and the thought of both an unknown airplane plus trying to do it as a TW (meaning learning TW techniques before the first flights) was daunting, thus my initial choice of NW. An engine failure 11 months ago gave me the opportunity to swap out the parts and convert to TW (I probably would not have done this except that the engine was already off the plane, so it made the choice easier). My advice (FWIW) is that if you really want a TW airplane and are early in getting your license plus early in the build, you should emphasize TW training as part of your PPL and you will have no issues flying the RV when the time comes.

Greg
 
What's wrong with -3 RV's?! :)

We have already talked about this... You said the tax man thinks they are parts or something... So being extremely conservative I am willing to cross over to the dark side and agree with the Dems. :eek: So....

GIVE ME ONE OF THOSE AIRPLANES!! It's only FAIR... :D
 
What I like about a tricycle gear airplane:

Handle nicely on modern paved runways.
Comfortable for passengers when on the ground.
A bit easier ground handling in crosswinds.
Not prone to ground loop if a landing gets out of hand.
All RV's are fast and fun :)


What I like about a conventional gear airplane:

The look when parked.
A less concern when flying from grass strips.
Time building toward owning an antique aircraft (which are almost all tailwheel)
All RV's are fast and fun :)
 
...What I like about a conventional gear airplane: ...Time building toward owning an antique aircraft (which are almost all tailwheel)...

I consider my 1900+ hours in C-170, J3, Stearman, etc. to be time building toward owning a conventional gear RV!:cool:
 
Right

I didn't even know owning 3 airplanes was an option :)

Yes!!
A RV7A and a RV8 would be a good choice. Or a RV10 and a RV8.
Get one of each!! I have three 'tandem' airplanes, a exp Supercub, a RV8 and a 4 place 'Tandem' ,, a C180J
All fun, and each has a mission.
 
Last edited:
I have a RV-7A and a F1 Rocket. At this point I have many more hours on the 7A than I do the Rocket, so my opinion is of course colored by my relative level of experience in both.

This being said I find the 7A to be much more easily and consistently, landed in varying runway, airframe loading and wind conditions. The Rocket, while not difficult to land, requires much more consideration of conditions and definitely requires active inputs when landing and rolling out, something to be dealt with when arriving at a unfamiliar airport after a long day of flying. My tailwheel experience in other makes of airplane also agree with this assessment. How an airplane looks is subjective and one can argue all day about how much skill, or lack of it, is required to land tri-gear vs. tailwheel. But I have to say I prefer the tri-gear configuration for its landing and rollout stability. And being able to see over the nose without doing S-turns while taxiing is an additional plus. Would I build or buy another tailwheel airplane? Sure. But I am under no delusions about it being "better" or "cooler" than a tri-gear one, it's just different. And in the end it really boils down to personal preference. Learn to fly both types and decide which YOU like best.
 
This is simple...

It takes about 10 hours +/- to learn to land a nosewheel aircraft and 10 hours +/- to learn to land a TW airplane.

You can do those 10 hours as part of your PPL or later, your choice.
 
Pick the one you like the best.

Remember that the nose wheel RV does not have conventional steering as the nose wheel of a trigear Cessna or piper spam can.

I completely agree with all points already made.

Your research on this issue would benifit from searching the VAF archives as there is much info on the nose-wheel vs tail-wheel issue.

I have done both. Personally, I like the tail-wheel RV the best, because of looks and off airport performance.

Good luck and let us know what you decide.
 
Joe, I am like you...an inexperienced pilot...learned to fly in a C172. I chose the RV7 2 1/2 yrs ago without a minute of TW time...for all the same reasons all the TW guys have already mentioned...and bottom line, it was what I wanted. I got my endorsement this summer in a Citabria. It was an initial (couple hrs flying time) steep learning curve as you 'learn' what the rudder pedals actually do and its certainly more challenging than flying a C172, but really not nearly as bad as some tri-gear guys like to claim. Dont be intimidated by the idea of it. I emphatically, without a doubt, know I made the right choice for me going with the -7 as I simply 'LOVE' to fly the Citabria and cant wait until the -7 is done. I say try it...you will probably love it also, if you have the right mindset...ie, enjoy the challenge it presents. Either way, you wont go wrong with either model. BTW...my opinion is that the nosegear collapse thing on the -A's is a little overblown if you are staying on improved runway surfaces. Good luck in your decision.
 
Tail wheel vs Nose wheel discussion is Popular

Year after year this is a never ending debate. Many are interested in this discussion at most airports across the country. Does it help a RV builder decide? Likely they have already made up their mind and just want support for thier decision. They get the support here for sure.

Do which one you like. If you dont know do some flying in each with the many that are available for a ride.

Near 2500 hits on just this one here.
 
The problem with Taildraggers is that in the 1960s I think many instructors and even more Magazine Writers simply FORGOT what their feet were for...so TDs got a bad rap. These would-be bards often touted how easy tricycles were and often cast suspiscious glances at TDs, maybe to mask their own inability to figure out that the funny things connected to their ankles actually have a purpose in flight. :D Beleive it or not, RVs don't really need much rudder either, so the transition is easier than one might think.

In reality, both configurations are pretty easy to learn. You often hear that a Tricycle is easier in wind. Not really. At least in the class of aircraft we are discussing:
Either way, you have to fly the aircraft to the ground and keep them there in the crosswind. Both simply require practice to understand what each wants. Same for taxi and roll out. Keeping a RV Taildragger straight on roll out is pretty simple and surprisingly easy - more so than some 1940s era TDs I've flown. And RV taxi is almost silly easy compared to trational Luscombes, Cubs, Tayorcraft and the like. To be frank, none of those are particularly hard to taxi either. But until you fly them, you may be prone to believe what you read. To put it bluntly, you do not have to be a hairy chested pilot to master any of the GA level TDs.

The problem is mostly MENTAL on the part of the individual pilot. Come to a TD with pre-conceived ideas, and those conceptions will rule you until someone shows you otherwise. Read about how this or that general aviation TD is a ground loop waiting to happen, while forgeting that the yutz writing those words probably couldn't fly their arse out of a hanger if they had to fly anything beyond a business oriented fly-itself GA aircraft, and you've allowed your views to be tainted by someone elses lack of experience, which has nothing to do with your own skill building. Or hairy chests. It all comes down to basic fundamental training and eventual familiarity.

Make your choice based not on what you've been told "about" the either type in terms of supposed difficulty to master. So long as you are trained properly, there is nothing to fear. As far as learning to fly either type, its a wash in my mind. Good instructor = a lifetime of good experience in either type.

Base the choice SOLEY on how you will ultimately USE the aircraft.

It just comes down to what you want to do with the thing. The main advantage of a TD is the ability to land pretty much anywhere, from a big paved runways, to a wet grass field, or a grass field with tall grass that makes some tricycle guys cringe. If you have a desire to go to interesting back country fields, or grass stips, and don't want to worry about the front wheel pant, or shimmy, or structural issues with the nose gear, you may want to consider a TD. At the same time, if all you are ever going to do is local or X-country from one paved strip to the next, then either will work fine.

So if you are a low time pilot, the only thing between you and any of the guys flying tail draggers (RV or otherwise) is some quality time with a TD qualified instructor. People tend to put way too much emphasis on the skill levels required for TDs and they scare newbees away from them for no reason.

Final note, don't let the supposed visibility of the Tri-gear RVs factor into this either. Many of the TDs, both GA and Vans, have a lot of over the nose visibility. We're not talking Spitfires here with a "thousand miles" of cowl. The RVs are all pretty easy to see over the nose, with the RV-8 probably being the easiest, and the RV-6 possibly being the worst. But "worst" is only by relative to the model line, and even the -6 has good over the nose visibility.
 
Does this thread in it's many forms ever make a difference in a builder's selection?

I think it does. I was a buyer, not a builder, but this sort of thread a few years ago convinced me that I would be willing to buy either, depending on what came along. I actually had a purchase agreement in place on a 6A, but ultimately that didn't go through, and I now have a 6 in my hangar.
 
The problem with Taildraggers is that in the 1960s I think many instructors and even more Magazine Writers simply FORGOT what their feet were for...so TDs got a bad rap.
Base the choice SOLEY on how you will ultimately USE the aircraft.

It just comes down to what you want to do with the thing. The main advantage of a TD is the ability to land pretty much anywhere, from a big paved runways, to a wet grass field, or a grass field with tall grass that makes some tricycle guys cringe. If you have a desire to go to interesting back country fields, or grass stips, and don't want to worry about the front wheel pant, or shimmy, or structural issues with the nose gear, you may want to consider a TD. At the same time, if all you are ever going to do is local or X-country from one paved strip to the next, then either will work fine.

QUOTE]

Very nice write up. Comes across well.
 
RV6A JoeM

Joe
If interested, I'm thinking of selling my QB RV6A with about 200hrs left to finish and fly her. Comes with new Lycom 0360 cert 0 hrs and Sensenich 83" new prop 0 hrs as well as a completed panel wiring ready to install. wings and controls painted and canopy tip up done ready for install and paint. Let me know if this works for you.
Alan
[email protected]
 
$.02

Suggestion:

Fly in a slider & tip up. Fly with a CS & FP prop. Fly nose & tail dragger. Build what you like.

Dan
 
Back
Top