technique for short wheel landings

After transition training, I mainly did three-point landings in my -4 because that's all I knew how. Then, I thought I should learn how to wheel land also, which I did and became decent at. They are smooth, but I never could get them to land nearly as short as my three-pointers.

I find myself needing to approach low and keeping in a bit of throttle all the way to touchdown and eating up a huge amount of runway in the process. But if I don't do this, the decent is too fast and I end up needing to pull back too much and put the plane in 3-point attitude instead of mains first. Or I will have too much energy and bounce.

What is the proper technique for getting short (or at least not too long) wheel landings? Approach speed, flaps, etc?? I was taught that for wheel landings, I should use only half flaps. Is this correct?

Brian
RV-4
dues happily paid

1flyingyogi said:

What is the proper technique for getting short (or at least not too long) wheel landings?

Click to expand...

Swap it for a 3 point landing.

A bit sarcastic sounding I suppose but it is nearly impossible to land as short doing a wheel landing as you can doing a three point if you using max possible braking with both.

Try this

Try to make your approach identical to your normal 3 point approach, but just as the mains touch ease the stick forward and hold the tail wheel off by 4 inches or so. In other words try an almost 3 point, but not quite.

I think the military calls it 'energy management'. If you're carrying power into the landing in a -4, you're going to use a lot of runway; no way around it. I suspect that if you're bouncing when doing power-off wheelies, it's not too much energy; it's too little.

When I learned to fly, my instructor would make me go to idle before turning base. Logic was that if you ever lose an engine, there'll be minimal difference in landing profile, and you're always in practice for 'dead stick' landings.

But a byproduct is that it becomes obvious that you don't need to carry power into the landing, even for wheel landings, if you 'do it right'.

As others have said, you'll never land as short on the mains as in 3 point, because you have to carry more speed (and energy) into the touchdown to keep the tail up. But the 'tail low' technique can get you fairly close. I try to trim my -4 for best approach speed if I'm planning a 3 point landing, and only pull as I flair. I was taught that if I'm planning a wheel landing, to leave in a bit of nose down trim so I'm pulling a bit during the descent, and as the wheels touch, release the back pressure. The instructor's logic was that it gets the student past the fear of an uncalibrated *push* causing a prop strike. It also 'automatically' gets the tail back up to plant the mains & kill lift. I'm much more comfortable with a push, now that I'm better calibrated to the plane.

Not saying my techniques will work for you, but do be aware that there are always new things to try.

Charlie

full flaps, please

Full flaps work best for wheel landings in my RV-6 because that lowers pitch attitude and puts the plane closer to proper attitude for touching down on the mains. It also assists with speed management.

Short field wheel landings require precise airspeed management, until that skill is in hand excess runway will be used. Once mastered, tail-low wheelies can be executed in nearly the same space as a three-point landing.

I've seen a Cessna 180 make a remarkably short wheel landing this way:

He carried power and full flaps in a tail-low slow approach, and at the moment of touchdown, chopped the power. He pushed the tail high so that the wing was at a negative angle of attack, producing down lift. This let him obtain additional traction while heavily braking.

It obviously took skill.

He was on dirt and grass. I imagine things might be slightly different on pavement.

I never tried it with my C-180 so I can't comment on it with actual experience.

Dave

Brian,

Great to hear you're not to busy at work to get some flying in!

Wheel landings are a fact of life for me in the RV-8. Three pointers not so much. I digress.

I recommend some experimentation. Try a normal stabilized approach but at a slower speed and higher angle of attack. Don't drag it in. On short final with the runway assured full flaps. If possible, throttle closed or only very slightly open to keep the fan turning. Level off over the numbers and let the tail drop as the angle of attack increases. Right as the mains touch, release the back pressure on the stick or give a slight amount of forward stick to plant the mains. If you must, give it a last short shot of power to arrest your decent and keep the mains from bouncing. Once the mains are planted, If the throttle is open at all, close it. Keep the flaps down for drag and don't hold the tail wheel up too high. Let the tail drop to increase the angle of attack and drag, helps slow you down. When its ready pin the tail wheel and apply moderate or greater brake pressure.

What is your idle set at? Lower should help but don't set it so low that it quits.

I know you have a FP prop. Cruise or climb? It's wood right? You know a CS would help.

I use to immediately raise the flaps when the mains touch. I keep the flaps down now to benefit from the extra drag and a shorter roll out. That along with a slower approach, reduced throttle input...

Doing element landings with experienced FFI guys has shown me that my approach speed on short final was too fast. My roll outs are much short than in the past.

Have fun practicing. Please share your results.

Happy New Year!

rvbuilder2002 said:

Swap it for a 3 point landing.

A bit sarcastic sounding I suppose but it is nearly impossible to land as short doing a wheel landing as you can doing a three point if you using max possible braking with both.

Click to expand...

After 19-years flying the RV-6 and over 3,200 hours in it, I agree. As others have said, you may be able to get shorter wheel landing when you find the slowest speed possible that you can land on the mains. In my RV-6, I do better wheel landings at 3/4 flaps than I do at full flaps. Your technique may vary and I only add this so that you can try to see what works best for you in your airplane.

More speed means more runway to stop and less speed means less runway to stop.

1flyingyogi said:

After transition training, I mainly did three-point landings in my -4 because that's all I knew how. Then, I thought I should learn how to wheel land also, which I did and became decent at. They are smooth, but I never could get them to land nearly as short as my three-pointers.

I find myself needing to approach low and keeping in a bit of throttle all the way to touchdown and eating up a huge amount of runway in the process. But if I don't do this, the decent is too fast and I end up needing to pull back too much and put the plane in 3-point attitude instead of mains first. Or I will have too much energy and bounce.

What is the proper technique for getting short (or at least not too long) wheel landings? Approach speed, flaps, etc?? I was taught that for wheel landings, I should use only half flaps. Is this correct?

Brian
RV-4
dues happily paid

Click to expand...

Brian,
Make the approach full gaps, 65 KIAS, visual glide slot on VASI, flare 2" off the ground.
After the flare, wheel land it tail low, or hold it off for 3 pointer, stopping distance will not be much different.

What is needed? This approach will get you slowed to walking speed in less than 1000' easy with no braking. At least it does for me. I have no need to get stopped in 400-500 feet so don't sweat it.

You are having difficulty landing because of dragging it in with power. Make a normal 2-3 degree visual slot approach, use power as needed to maintain slot and approach speed. If approach ends up too steep for you, add just a smidgeon of power going into flare. My RV-8 won't flare out of steep low speed approach, drag goes up too quickly and it clobbers on. Your 4 might be doing same.

I have just 170 hours dragging a tail and probably will get better as time goes on, but the above technique works just fine for now. Have not bounced in months and stopping distance is no big deal, normally have to add power to get to 1500' turn off.

David-aviator said:

Brian,
Make the approach full gaps, 65 KIAS, visual glide slot on VASI, flare 2" off the ground.

Click to expand...

That's about 8KT faster than necessary if you're flying a shallow VASI approach in an RV-4. I'd suggest forgetting the concept of a VASI altogether for day VFR flying. It's a useless distraction which really provides no benefit for the exercise your'e asking about. The 4 is the most floaty, lightly loaded of the aerobatic RV models, with the slowest stall speed. Don't know if the OP has a FP or CS prop, but you can easily fly 57KT (65mph) power off, solo in a FP RV-4 unless the airplane is unusually heavy.

The main difference between the 3-pointer and the wheel landing is the height above the runway that you break the glide. For a wheel landing, you level out at a lower altitude than you would for a 3-pointer. But to break the glide lower to the ground while touching the mains smoothly requires practice.

Everyone has their preferred recipe. Don't overthink it. Just learn to put the airplane down approximately there you want at minimal airspeed. I don't know why anyone would use less than full flaps when doing a short field landing. Practice, practice.

Thanks for all the suggestions guys. I will try the lower approach speeds next time up I'm. I normally approach at 80mph. I've heard many people approach slower (75 or even 70mph), and I tried it once or twice, but it just didn't *feel* right. My angle of attack just feels too high, the plane feels like it's in a mushing glide (almost like it's in harrier coming down) and descending too fast. When I get close enough to the runway to round-out and flare, there doesn't seem to be any energy left and I plop down hard on the runway - unless I add in a good amount of throttle to break the descent- but it's a tricky balancing act to get it just right. But maybe I'm having a hard time with the slower approach speeds only because I haven't practiced it enough??

My plane is 1000lbs empty. CG is about right (I normally fly with ballast weight in the tail when solo). FP prop, 160hp engine.

Charlie, good to see you're flying with the FFI guys. Lots of fun! I rode with one of the guys locally and was offered to join their group and learn to fly formation properly, but I just haven't had the time.

My priority at the moment is to become decent enough that I can start competing in IAC Primary class later this year. Not sure if I will be good enough, but it's fun trying.

Brian
RV-4
dues happily paid

Don't get too hung up on the numbers. Stall speeds vary among different -4's, and there's also variation among different aircraft in pitot/static ASI setups affecting the reading. Your 80 mph might be different some someone else's. ASI doens't need to be accurate, just consistent. Find the number that works best for you depending on the conditions and what you're trying to accomplish.

That being said, it seems more pilots than not approach a little faster than necessary because it "feels" better. Practice making small incremental reductions in your approach speed, using good judgment with respect to wind conditions. Or maybe your 80 is right and no need.

Luddite beat me to it; I was going to say that if the plane truly isn't comfortable at those speeds, then something is 'out of whack'. Might be indicated airspeed; might be flying weight; might be actual cg. My -4 (O320, FP wood prop, 910 lbs empty weight) does fly final very differently with someone in the back seat, especially if they're heavy. I'll usually add 5 kts or so when I've got a heavy passenger.

If you didn't build the a/c and it's been around for a while, be aware that a lot of things can change over the years, and it's possible that some of those changes don't get documented. Might be worth re-weighing & re-checking cg numbers.

Luddite is right that what's indicated can vary a lot. However, it's good to know whether your a/c conforms, in real terms, to Van's performance numbers. Stall speeds are notoriously difficult to establish accurately, but you should still be able to fly final at 1.3 times your indicated stall speed. Van's numbers indicate that a -4 should stall at between 48 & 54 mph. So worst case, you should be able to approach at 70mph if your ASI is accurate. I'd consider checking your IAS at stall to see if it's close to Van's numbers. If it is, then that loops us back to cg, or... just getting more comfortable with the a/c. You might also try flying without the ballast.

I've been flying them for >20 years but my flying frequency over the last several years has been abysmally low, so it's not like I'm the world's greatest stick. What I can tell you is that because of the very wide speed range of the a/c, it can be very disorienting to someone coming out of the certified world. That's especially true if their training was by some airline pilot wannabe who taught them to fly 5 mile, so-called 'stabilized' approaches, carrying power all the way to touchdown.

FWIW,

Charlie

I did the weight and balance myself after I bought the plane and it was accurate with the builder's numbers. Since then I've made lots of changes to the plane and have calculated the new CG and weight, but have not empirically done it on the scales yet.

I'm pretty sensitive to what the plane "likes" and can feel the difference weight makes on airspeed. It definitely wants more speed with more weight. Solo, just below 80mph on the approach feels right to me and with a passenger, a little above 80. I'll just play around with the speeds a bit more and see what happens.

But it's true that a big reason why I was using up a lot of runway, esp. in the beginning, was from coming in too fast. Mike Seager taught 85mph on approach and that's what I was using for a long time until I found that 80mph worked better for me.

Also, as a student pilot (before my RV), I was taught that it's better to come in a little steep and if necessary, I should be able to make the field on idle. (my instructor had an engine out on final once and that made a very big impression on him). I got decent at landing without using throttle (at idle) and it worked out great in that plane - a Sling (very similar to an RV12). But in my -4, I can't seem to make very good landings if I come in too steep. I like to keep just a tad of throttle on approach and even all the way to touch-down and I find that my landings are smoother and more controlled that way. But I'll try the different suggestions you guys gave and see how it goes.

My RV6 is an A model so I don't have much experience in the RVs, but I do have over 5000 hrs flying tailwheel, from larger ag planes down to a Kitfox on a narrow abandoned railway I call home strip that is 2640' long. The reasons why one wants to wheel land varies about as much as technique. If you want to wheel land because of crosswind control, then you will want to keep your speed up on approach, use less flaps, make the approach flatter and basically fly it to the ground with a firm forward check. If it is really windy, I'll keep the tail off the ground longer than normal with full forward control and even add some power as I brake. The critical time for loss of control is at that time when the tail starts to lose airspeed to fly but not enough weight on the tailwheel. Slowing down with the tail high keeps the rudder in undisturbed air for extra authority, the down elevator adds drag at the back which reduces the pendulum effect and shortens the ground roll even with a bit of power on to keep straight. For short field landings, even the Valdez guys usually use a modified wheel landing by coming in with a slower steeper approach, full flaps, power to arrest sink rate, tail low on touch down and immediately applying controled braking with stick in gut. The problem most people have is burning through half the runway in a shallow flare or not arresting the sink rate and bouncing on the numbers. Practice helps, but flying with others is the best way to learn. I find the best methods of figuring things out is to do "spray runs" down the entire length of the runway. You make your approach to land, but add enough power to keep from landing and hold it off as close to the runway as you can, but more importantly, keep straight. At the end of the runway, add power and go around. Start 10 feet off at 75 kts and work your way down to inches off the runway at 60 kts. In no time the students get over the anxiety of having to land, they learn the flare technique that works for them, learn to keep straight with the feet and in no time, instead of adding power, they reduce it and grease every landing.

1flyingyogi said:

Also, as a student pilot (before my RV), I was taught that it's better to come in a little steep and if necessary, I should be able to make the field on idle. (my instructor had an engine out on final once and that made a very big impression on him). I got decent at landing without using throttle (at idle) and it worked out great in that plane - a Sling (very similar to an RV12). But in my -4, I can't seem to make very good landings if I come in too steep. I like to keep just a tad of throttle on approach and even all the way to touch-down and I find that my landings are smoother and more controlled that way. But I'll try the different suggestions you guys gave and see how it goes.

Click to expand...

I think, like most, you're a product of your training and experience. Those who were taught the "modern" stabilized approach way of flying feel anything more than 2-3 degrees is a steep approach. Those who learned to fly in old rag and tube taildraggers have a different idea of what steep is. When I started flying RVs (FP props) I initially had trouble with way overshooting my touchdown spot because of how shallow these airplanes approach, even power off with full flaps at average approach speed. RVs don't slip very well compared to some other types, so that had limited ability to steepen the approach.

What I am saying is try stepping out of your comfort zone, within reason, in small increments. A power off, full flap, honest 80 mph approach in an RV-4 is quite shallow relative to many other types which can easily be landed power off. It's good practice should you face an engine out situation some day.

Practice and timing.

No RV experience, but a few hundred hours in an L-19. That plane was a handful to wheel land because it was so tall - any uncorrected (or lazy) inputs on landing would guarantee a swing that would have to be corrected.

A 3-point attitude with likely give the best results, provided your approach is 1.3Vso, full flap. The key is to minimize energy prior to touchdown, as any excess energy just means that the brakes will have to work harder, eating up runway.

Again, with my lack of RV time, someone please chime in if I'm blowing smoke. But with full flap at 1.3Vso, you should have to hold a little extra power to maintain whatever approach angle you want. (Sidebar, 60 flap in the L-19 meant you needed an extra 5kts, or 500rpm until flare, lest the plane bury itself on the numbers)

Keep the power on until the flare. As you flare, gradually bring the power back to idle. If doing both is too much for you, and landing distance is the goal, you can start bringing the power back at, say, 20ft above ground, but then you might not have enough energy to arrest the descent rate in the flare, resulting in a firm-ish landing.

Go enjoy time in your 4 and find what works for you! Somewhere your plane says "Experimental", so go experiment!

The shortest two landings i've made have both been wheel landings... Each time I surprised myself with how quickly I was able to stop. Sadly, my skillset still isn't quite high enough to do this on demand...

My best recollection is that I had full flap, was at minimum speed for a wheel landing, and it was a tail-low landing... Pinning the mains by raising the tail as soon as they touch, and then modulating pitch with increased braking to keep the fuselage level until it wanted to settle on its own.

I know in theory I should be able to do a three-point shorter, but I don't think I have yet.

Building a KR2 is the path to the shortest wheels I can think of to land on.....