What's new
Van's Air Force

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

The truth about tail draggers - Please

S

Steve Brown

Well Known Member
I've read many of the tri verses tail wheel wars. Very entertaining, but not necessarily helpful

According to tail dragger pilots its no big deal, but according to insurance companies that's not quite true.

What I am wondering is how difficult the transition is for someone who has flown a bit already in a tri-gear. I'm guessing if you start off in a tail dragger its not a huge deal, or if you transition early.

I've got about 1200-1300 hours, which is not a huge number, but enough to form some pretty firm habits that might be hard to break - before breaking the airplane.

Anyone have this experience that can share how it was? That is, spend a decent amount of time forming habits in a tri gear, then make the move to tail wheel.
 
I had about 300 nosewheel hrs before starting tailwheel...

I have right at 400 hours now. The last 80+ were exclusively in the RV7 tailwheel.

My past experiences were in a Piper Cherokee and Warrior, Cessna 152, several versions of 172 and the last being a 1968 Cessna 172 straight tail.

I am not rated for complex aircraft, IFR, comm, multi, and I have never flown a constant speed prop. So I'm pretty much a stick and rudder kinda guy.

Insurance required a 5hr endorsement (or however long it took) and another 25 hours of dual in the tailwheel.

The big difference right now that I see between a nosewheel and tailwheel: (real layman descriptions)

1. you have to focus and keep 'flying the airplane' as long as the engine is running.
2. You actually have to use the rudder pedals
3. I don't land the tailwheel as smooth as I did a nosewheel. I often don't 'stick' the wheels on a 2pt landing- I don't bounce or balloon, I just don't have the timing to push the stick forward as the wheels meet mother earth at the same time. Practice.
4. Once the tail drops, I am much more active on the pedals keeping the nose forward, that almost never happens in a nosewheel landing. Still safe, but it seems the nature of the beast. You 'feel' the crosswind much more.

Besides needing more practice, I love it. I fly often on the coast and we see some wicked gusty winds and I'll land half flaps or no flaps and I might be thankful I have a wide runway, but I never felt in danger.

I feel more comfortable flying into grass strips now as well.

Besides, it looks cool!

To sum up, they fly the same- just small differences in landing :) If you can fly complex airplanes, IFR, twins, or walk and chew gum at the same time, then I think you'll be fine.

Go try- get your tailwheel endorsement, by the 5th hour you should have a feeling for it.
 
Tailwheels

Steve,
There is a lot of myth out there about flying tailwheel vs tricycle airplanes. Let me try to boil it down a little. Obviously, the only real difference is ground handling, takeoff and landing. And all those come down to the simple fact that the center of gravity is behind the main gear. Simply put, the airplane is going to try to turn all the time. The only skill needed to master a taildragger is keeping the airplane straight, really straight. You can do some basic tailwheel training in your 'A', simply practice keeping the airplane exactly on the centerline. I mean exactly, not a few feet off, right on the line. The bottom line is your feet. they have to be moving most of the time. Once you master the tailwheel thing, the movements will be very small because you are "ahead" of the airplane.

And yes, as the insurance stats prove, it is a little more difficult than a trike, but it can be mastered. Find a good instructor and go have fun. Consider looking at CP Aviation in Santa Paula.

John Clark ATP, CFI
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
Steve,

I have a lot less hours than you and I enjoy the tail wheel flying for several reasons including nostalgia and good looks.

The fact is if you want to go with a tail wheel then you should. Have lessons and give yourself several hours. Anyone with average nose wheel skills will learn the necessary tail wheel skills. The tail wheel keeps you honest and focused which you should be anyway.

Like nose wheel planes, there are differences between models, with some being easier than others. Many if not most TW RV's fly with direct control over the tail wheel so you're not just relying on the rudder and possibly differential braking - makes a big difference.

I first learnt with just rudder and brakes for direction control and then I flew with chains to the tail wheel - wow much easier!

After a while it becomes second nature.

Go for it.
 
Poisonous snakes are completely harmless....

.....when respected and handled with care.

The problem is, not everyone handles them with care. That's what the insurance company is concerned about. Case in point: A guy that flies out of the same airport I do bought a new Cub Crafter Cub. It's a low and slow type. In less than six months, he's ground looped it twice. The first time was a freebie. 4 loops, no damage. The second time was not a freebie. Bent gear and prop strike. He's perfectly fine, after a change of underwear.

The moral of the story is, tailwheels are like snakes. Stay ahead, treat it with respect, and know your limitations. Do not get complacent, or it will bite you.

That being said, learning to fly TW's has been the most fun I've had in aviation yet, and very rewarding. I've heard that there are two kinds of TW pilots, those who have ground-looped, and those who will. I haven't yet, so I fully expect it to happen on every single landing.

(Take with a grain of salt. I'm a low-timer, much lower than you. Have about 50 in TW's, all in the past 18mos. Like you I wanted to be able to make the call myself. FBO had two citabrias at the time. Why not?! I suggest you find a CFI with a TW and get the endorsement. I "earned" the endorsement in about 7 hours. FBO insurance required 10 in type for solo, so we did aerobatics to help make it interesting.)

Go fly.
 
CP Aviation

John Clark said:
Consider looking at CP Aviation in Santa Paula.
Click to expand...

Since you're in SoCal... I agree. Here's a link: http://www.cpaviation.com/

I don't have a tail-wheel endorsement yet... and plan on building a tricycle... but started getting some tail dragger time for the added experience and skills. I can vouch for CP Aviation. I got a couple hours there recently while on a trip in the area. Very impressed with their program. First time in a tail-dragger... first time with a stick... the only trouble I had was my face getting tired of the grin. The C-172 is a truck compared to a Decathlon! And I hear if you can land a Decathlon... the RV tail-draggers are no problem. But as everyone here is saying... you gotta learn to use your feet... and really stay on top of it from start-up to shut down. DJ
 
My 2 cents

For a start in the USA you need at least 10 hours of dual instruction to get a ?Conventional Gear? endorsement in your log book before you can act as PIC in a tail dragger. Plus for currency requirements the three landings in 90 days must be to a full stop ? no touch and goes for all the reasons in the posts above.

Tail draggers are unstable during touch down and roll out. The center of gravity and center of pressure are behind the main wheels where the ground or braking drag is applied so the weight of the plane tends to want to overtake the wheels. You do a lot of dancing on the rudder pedals during roll out to keep things running straight. In a tricycle gear the weight is already in front of the wheels so everything tends to want to straighten its self out.

Nose in the air during initial take off roll also induces P factor and then lifting the tail reduces it and adds gyro effect. More rudder dancing.

Jim Sharkey
RV6 ? Wiring
(PA12 time)
 
jsharkey said:
My 2 cents

For a start in the USA you need at least 10 hours of dual instruction to get a ?Conventional Gear? endorsement in your log book before you can act as PIC in a tail dragger.
Click to expand...

This is not correct...there is no hour requirement to get an endorsement...

61.31-
(i) Additional training required for operating tailwheel airplanes. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of a tailwheel airplane unless that person has received and logged flight training from an authorized instructor in a tailwheel airplane and received an endorsement in the person's logbook from an authorized instructor who found the person proficient in the operation of a tailwheel airplane. The flight training must include at least the following maneuvers and procedures:

(i) Normal and crosswind takeoffs and landings;

(ii) Wheel landings (unless the manufacturer has recommended against such landings); and

(iii) Go-around procedures.

(2) The training and endorsement required by paragraph (i)(1) of this section is not required if the person logged pilot-in-command time in a tailwheel airplane before April 15, 1991.
Click to expand...

Other than that, I agree with all of the above. Go for it!
:cool:
 
jsharkey said:
My 2 cents

For a start in the USA you need at least 10 hours of dual instruction to get a ?Conventional Gear? endorsement in your log book before you can act as PIC in a tail dragger. Plus for currency requirements the three landings in 90 days must be to a full stop ? no touch and goes for all the reasons in the posts above.
Click to expand...

What FAR says you need 10 hrs dual? I had less when I got my endorsement. Lots of glider time helped. Same deal, you fly them till stopped.
 
Taildragger vs. Nosegear

Steve Brown said:
I've got about 1200-1300 hours, which is not a huge number, but enough to form some pretty firm habits that might be hard to break - before breaking the airplane.

Anyone have this experience that can share how it was? That is, spend a decent amount of time forming habits in a tri gear, then make the move to tail wheel.
Click to expand...


Dear Steve:

I had about the same number of hours in C-177, C-182's, and a Bellanca Super Viking before getting my tail wheel endorsement. I was signed off in less than 5 hours. Thereafter a buddy of mine made his C-140 available and I got a couple more hours duel in it and started flying it regularly for a couple of weeks with no problems.

My buddy who had the C-140 was buidling an RV-6 and he said the -6 was easier to land and ground handle than the C-140.

I am currently building an RV-7 and wouldn't have an RV 2 place tricycle gear airplane if I had a choice. Since the RV-10 wasn't avaialbe with a tailwheel I built it anyway.

I miss my 2 place RV and when I decided to build one for me there was no choice but to go with a taildragger.

Good luck on your choice, you will be happy with either, as long as the choice is a Van's RV.
 
cjensen said:
This is not correct...there is no hour requirement to get an endorsement...

61.31-


Other than that, I agree with all of the above. Go for it!
:cool:
Click to expand...

Must have been our club's insurance that needed the 10 hours when I got my endorsement:eek:
 
I had around 1200 hours trike time before buying a supercub. I was required to have 10 hours dual for insurance requirements.

I am guessing that most trike drivers would ground loop and probably damage a conventional gear airplane without TW training. I probably would have.

I have 400 hours in both the supercub and RV8. I can't imagine ground looping either now. After some level of proficiency I began to feel a swerve and correct before it became a factor. It becomes automatic and completely comfortable.

The conventional geared airMosheen is probably more difficult in ground handling, certainly less forgiving.
 
Straight - Straight - Straight!!!!

John Clark said:
Steve,
Simply put, the airplane is going to try to turn all the time. The only skill needed to master a taildragger is keeping the airplane straight, really straight.
Click to expand...

Not to degrade the effect of John's centerline comment, but want to reiterate a more important point he made for impact lest it get lost. The one key word about TW ground handling on landing = STRAIGHT.

Work on keeping centerline for sure, but more importantly stay dead on straight. Dead straight and off centerline on touchdown is far better than on centerline and the nose cocked at an angle. Don't sacrafice straight to make centerline.

Have a friend that does this all the time and he can't seem to figure out why he has to work so hard on landing. That's why.

Although bad form, nosewheel pilots can accept this condition from time to time because the nosewheel will self-correct this condition and the CG config relative to the gear will adjust the aircraft ultimately to the direction of travel. Therein lies the big difference in nosewheel vs. TW handling. The TW aircraft will want to go in the direction the aircraft nose is pointed (forgetting effects of wind for a moment) and not in the aircraft's direction of travel. It will keep going that way until you correct it. If you let it go too long, then it will absolutely ground loop.:eek:
 
Hi Steve,

As a CFI, I've trained hundreds of taildragger pilots. Best advice is a get a great, experienced instructor. You'll need 8-10 hours average to be proficient. Don't hurry it. Enjoy the challenge. Read Stick and Rudder. The first 5 hours are downright frustrating/intimidating, but you'll begin to see the light after that and move on to really fun stuff like wheel landings, bounce recovery, one wheel crosswind landings, rejected takeoffs, etc.

The skills needed for "conventional gear" proficiency are a conditioned response, or reflex. It has to come from the depth of your brain without cognitive thought. It takes 8 hours or so for most brains to switch the taildragger two-step into a thoughtless reaction. Again, don't hurry the process, it just takes time.

An old timer once told me fly the thing until it is tied down. Pretty good advice, even tho RV's are pretty tame as taildraggers go. After you master the RV, be ready to have your *** handed to you the first time you fly a Citabria, Pitts, Stearman etc (in other words be careful, better yet get a proper checkout).

Fly safe.


Bob
 
No Reason Not To Do It

Steve,

I have about 500 hours, complex sign-off, and IFR rated. Most of my time is in C-172s, and Archer, and a Grumman Cheetah.

Couple years ago I got several hours of instruction in a Cub, and I have a couple of hours in an Aeronca Chief.

I couldn't solo the Cub because the FBO didn't have it insured for solo, and in about 3 hours I wasn't quite ready to solo. But I had moved beyond the frustration stage to the fun stage. At that point, the FBO took the Cub out of service to rebuild it.

Honestly, flying the Cub was an absolute blast and not that intimidating after a few hours.

I couldn't believe how much better of a pilot my IFR rating made me. The same thing happened with my tailwheel time. It was great, great fun, and it makes me approach my tricycle gear landings with more intentionality. I work harder to keep my Grumman absolutely straight on touchdown because I know that one of these days I'll be flying a tailwheel aircraft again and I don't want to get out of practice.

Flying any plane is a blast. Where the third wheel is isn't what makes the plane fun. The fact that it's an airplane is what makes it fun for me.

David
 
Dito to Bob "rocketboy". Read Stick and Rudder, it breaks it down into piece by piece explanations of what to do and what to expect. I bought my Luscombe when I was 21 and had about 150 hours and 8 months with a ppl. The only instructor I could find wanted $100 an hour, and when he found there were no breaks on the passenger side, wanted nothing to do with it. Flame me if you want, but I taught myself how to fly it. (after reading Stick and Rudder) Wasn't for another 2 years 'till I found a guy with a J-3 who signed me off after 20 minutes.
Farmer by trade, we have center pivot irrigation (i.e. the fields are large circles) and regularly land it going around a circle. Strait is a good direction to stick to, I'm just saying it's not hard to get the hang of and once you master it and I think it's a more rewarding way to fly.
The old saying "there are tailwheel pilots who have groundlooped and those who will" is only seriously considered by those who don't feel 100% under control behind a stick with a dancing rudder.

*cough* knock on wood *cough*
 
Last edited:
Taildragger will make you a better pilot

I was a 5600 hour ATP before I started flying taildraggers, and I started basically after about 25 hours of Decathalon time in the High Performance One Design that I built. We have over 200 hours in the One Design, and now I'm flying my 9A which is just completed.
What I notice is how much, and naturally I'm using the rudder, as compared to all those thousands of hours in the past of not using the rudder. Am more concerned about the location of the ball all the time now.
Regards
Jack
N99552
19 hours, 21 to go!!!
 
Just remember - back in "the day", it was common to solo a J-3 Cub with only 5 hours total time in the logbook....humans (and taidraggers) haven't changed that much since then, so don't let them scare you!
 
TD's

Hopfully not too much thread drift here.

Ref. Paul's post, I rebuilt an Aeronca Champ while stationed in Hawaii back in the early 70's. During final assymbly at Honolulu Intl., the wife of an Aloha Airlines pilot stopped by to chat and told me that she was sure that N2721E was the airplane that she had soloed in years earlier. Next day she brought her log book by and sure enough it was the plane she soloed! She had 4 hours and 15 minutes of dual in her log book when she was signed off to solo!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Take heart the beast can be tamed. (And you're gonna love it when you get signed off!)
 
It's really just a big ol' sea monster story. I think that folks will always try to make things they do sound a bit more difficult than they really are. As others have noted, it was ALL taildragger at one time and we were able to win two world wars that way! I would also like to comment on the earlier post that said that the plane always wants to turn. I suppose this is technically true as far as center of mass and wheel placement goes, but it really isn't an accurate description of the feel of a taildragger. Keep in mind that things improve dramatically once the plane is moving along or has a good propwash going. In other words, the thing is hardest to handle during rollout and initial throttle up.
 
Making mine an RV-9

Steve Brown said:
I've read many of the tri verses tail wheel wars. Very entertaining, but not necessarily helpful

According to tail dragger pilots its no big deal, but according to insurance companies that's not quite true.

What I am wondering is how difficult the transition is for someone who has flown a bit already in a tri-gear. I'm guessing if you start off in a tail dragger its not a huge deal, or if you transition early.

I've got about 1200-1300 hours, which is not a huge number, but enough to form some pretty firm habits that might be hard to break - before breaking the airplane.

Anyone have this experience that can share how it was? That is, spend a decent amount of time forming habits in a tri gear, then make the move to tail wheel.
Click to expand...


Hi Steve. Of all the choices we have with the Experimentals, I chose a tailwheel configuration. WHY? For all the good reasons mentioned above in the other posts. I have done absolutely no tqailwheel work what so ever and I'm looking forward to it. And the visibility over the nose of the RV-9 is almost as good as a nose dragger - well maybe not that good - but "S" turns are not going to be necessary while taxiing.
 
My Take on the Taildragger Landing Issue

Yes and no. I think a lot of the tailwheel discussions center around getting to the point where you are making ?safe? landings. To that point, I agree, the RV has plenty of rudder, and great visability. That combination makes the time required to become ?safe? fairly short.
However it is a whole other step up the learning curve to get to the point where you can make ?pretty? landings in a variety of conditions. The CG to landing gear relationship exacerbates any inaccuracies that exist at the point of landing. For me, keeping the nose straight is rarely the problem (although with a big passenger in the back, the increased inertia needs to be accounted for). For me the problem is landing once?that is?no hops. The RV is not stalled when you 3 point (and I almost always three point because I have the older ?short? gear, and a ?long? 72? Whirlwind prop), so the speed and attitude has to be just right. If the wind is gusting, or if you have turbulence, you can get variations that affect your ability to hit the position and speed just right. I have always tried to combat that by holding the position inches above the runway until the final 5 or so knots bleeds off. But when you do that, sometimes you run the risk of a slight premature touchdown which unlike a tricycle gear increases your AoA and the sloppy landing is initiated. On the other hand, if you hold it at a foot or so off the runway while you wait for the last 5 knots, you risk hitting a burble or gust that makes you pull a bit, then you slap the tailwheel first?.another unsexy landing. So, in conclusion, if you don?t wheel land, it?s hard (at least for me) to make a consistent smooth landing if there is any gusting. Anyway, that?s what I still struggle with?.but I?m sure if I go flying one more time, I will get it down??yeah right??..
 
szicree said:
As others have noted, it was ALL taildragger at one time and we were able to win two world wars that way!
Click to expand...

The B-29 Super Fortresses, Enola Gay & Bock's Car both had nose gear...

As much as I admire the North American P-51 Mustang for it's taildragger looks; the mighty Super Fortress might have looked a little less mighty as a taildragger. :D

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
Thanks guys!

Especially those who learned tail dragger's after flying a while.
So far I've never left the runway, landed gear up, or bent an airplane in any way. I'll admit my main fear is tarnishing my record with a screw up.

I suppose that's a wimp reason.

I found my nose wheel is in the way when I work on the airplane. Also, don't like the way it looks, wouldn't mind having the 2 kts it loses, would like to land on the occasional rough field.

Also, I always seem to be shopping for my next airplane and some of the nicest RVs seem to be TG.
 
Steve,

I had about 1,600 hours flying nose draggers before I decided to get my TG endorsement. My reasons for doing so was to keep moving forward in flying skills. It was a goal of mine to become a competent TG pilot, and after 12 TG hours total (8 hours for the endorsement) I feel confident, but I must admit I'm still working on the competent part.

The finner point of flying a TG have been stated already and I won't bore you with my rendition. However, the hardest thing I have ever done in an airplane is when wheel landing a TG is to push the stick forward to stick the wheels to the ground. It goes against everything I have ever done in a tri-gear so that was the hardest habit to break. It's second nature now, but for awhile it was tough!

Get your endorsement then decided if you want to continue to fly TG's. It WILL make you a much better pilot. Listen to the guys that fly TG's they can give you a lot of great advice. My advice? Keep it straight down the runway. Always.

Don't worry about your "No Bent Airplane Record". All records are meant to be broken. ;)
 
Last edited:
Steve Brown said:
According to tail dragger pilots its no big deal, but according to insurance companies that's not quite true.
Click to expand...
Even this isn't true. After talking to a friend who got his -7A flying about the same time as my -9 we found out the only difference in insurance had to do with the difference in hull value. Once that adjustment was made, the quotes were identical.

Here is the conversation I like to have with pilots who are thinking about getting their TW endorsement:

Me: How many hours did it take you to solo a tricycle geared airplane?
Them: 8 to 15 hours (This number varies of course.)
Me: Expect it to take about the same to solo a tail wheel.
Them: That sounds reasonable.
Me: And don't be surprised if it takes you 100 hours to feel really comfortable. Again, no different than flying a tricycle.

Besides, I found out at around the age of four or five that tricycles stink! :cool:
 
In all reality....

N941WR said:
Besides, I found out at around the age of four or five that tricycles stink! :cool:
Click to expand...

The taildraggers and nose draggers all sit on three wheels making them all trikes - right?!?!

Congratualtions on the 9 month quick build - I gotta believe you were involved in the beginning to get the ball rolling on that one. How far into the project are you guys?
 
Just more responsive

In a nutshell and in my humble opinion, TW's are more responsive on the ground than NW's :)

Just like all RV's are more responsive in the air than many other GA planes. Flying a TW is just an extension of this.
 
szicree said:
As others have noted, it was ALL taildragger at one time and we were able to win two world wars that way!
Click to expand...
True, but the air fields were big enough to always allow the TG aircraft to land into the wind. It's cross winds that now make life more difficult.
 
Geico266 said:
True, but the air fields were big enough to always allow the TG aircraft to land into the wind. It's cross winds that now make life more difficult.
Click to expand...
That was true during WW1, but by the time that WW2 came around they had generally switched to runways rather than big fields where you could land in any direction. Pilots learned to fly on tail wheel aircraft, and they flew in some pretty horrible conditions. But, they had a very high accident rate during non-combat operations too (over 15,500 aircrew were killed in the USA during WW2, and any more died in non-combat ops over seas).

Anyone who has the skills that a pilot should have is capable of learning to fly a tail wheel RV. But, note that some pilots don't really have the skills that they should have. If you are a marginal pilot, then perhaps it is best to stick to tricycle gear RVs. If you are not in the bottom 10% of general aviation pilots, then you should be capable of learning to fly a tail wheel RV.

But, I don't care how good a tail wheel pilot you are - you should be able to safely handle a larger crosswind in a tricycle geared aircraft than you could in a similar aircraft with tail wheel.
 
The truth is in "Stick and Rudder"

The truth about tail draggers was written by Wolfgang Langewiesche in 1944 in his book "Stick and Rudder".

He makes a case for the tricycle configuration at a time when much of aviation was conventional, especially in training - and the accident rate was not good. After the war the numbers were pulled together - while some 4500 aircraft were lost in combat, some 7100 were lost in training accidents claiming more than 15000 lives.

The tricycle gear airplane came into being because it is safer and it remains safer today. Tail draggers are popular because of the perception they are cool and beckon to days of glory, fame, adventure and dare devil - all parts of our heritage as aviators in war and peace. But the truth is, trikes are safer.
 
Kevin Horton said:
Anyone who has the skills that a pilot should have is capable of learning to fly a tail wheel RV. But, note that some pilots don't really have the skills that they should have. If you are a marginal pilot, then perhaps it is best to stick to tricycle gear RVs. If you are not in the bottom 10% of general aviation pilots, then you should be capable of learning to fly a tail wheel RV
Click to expand...

But..................... I don't want a tailwheel RV. I hear they're too easy compared to other tail draggers! :D

I think I'll go for a Rocket, F1, or perhaps a Husky; and even a Cub Crafters Super Cub.:)

I share a hangar with a super sized Pitts M-12 that has a Russian radial. Maybe that's the "macho" ticket! :D

L.Adamson -- RV6A
 
So far my demonstrated X-wind component is 27kts in my 7. I think it will handle another 5kts or so with no problem. Flying a tailwheel is just another skill to learn. It's like getting any other rating, the guys that practice and get proficient rarely have any problems. Don
 
I trained in Diamond Katanas, had less than 200 hours in my logbook (all tri-gear) until the day I went for transition training with Mike Seagar in his RV-7. Mike made a great analogy which I think gets the point over really well. He compared taildraggers to trying to balance an egg on top of an upside down hemisphere - the egg always wants to accelerate its way to destruction :D (Hope that's a fair representation of what he said.)

The previous admonishments about keeping the plane tracking straight are right on the money. The further it gets away from a straight line the harder it gets to recover it - you've got to jump all over any deviation or you're heading for trouble. Having said that I found my RV-9 to be far easier to control than the Citabria I was also getting some training in. The rudder on the 7, 8 and 9 has a lot of authority.

I'm really glad I built and learned to fly a taildragger - the experience forced me to push up my stick and rudder skills. It took me 100 to 150 hours in my 9 before I felt confident that I could put her on the runway with some finesse in gusty crosswinds (the norm at KHAF).

The other tip that really helped me I picked up from the RV mavens in SoCal. I had a bad habit of bouncing my landings which can really complicate things in a tail dragger. Someone pointed out that RVs have very springy gear - so you want to focus on reducing your rate of descent to almost nil as you kiss the runway. Once I got that through my head my landings improved ten-fold.

Now I take a great deal of care to manage airpseed and rate of descent in those last 30 seconds. Sounds obvious I know but you can get away with a lot in a tri-gear that a taildragger just won't accept.

If you're doing a fair job of landing a tri-gear, you're not far from doing the same in a taildragger - its just a little more training, a little more knowledge, a little more application of good technique and practice, practice.

Go for it !!

(And BTW, ****** (note: Moderator removed word)the insurance company, no way on this green earth are they going to influence what I fly or how. IMHO insurance is no more than a state mandated scam.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Look guys, tail wheels just plain suck. They are dangerous and totally obsolete. Using the rudder is totally overrated. Plus they just look so uncool.

Again, tail dragger's just suck.

Don't do it! ;)


P.S. I have a bumper sticker that says: "Real pilots fly tail dragger's.
Amelia Reid Aviation." :D
 
On your original Q Steve...

Steve Brown said:
What I am wondering is how difficult the transition is for someone who has flown a bit already in a tri-gear. I'm guessing if you start off in a tail dragger its not a huge deal, or if you transition early.

I've got about 1200-1300 hours, which is not a huge number, but enough to form some pretty firm habits that might be hard to break - before breaking the airplane.

Anyone have this experience that can share how it was? That is, spend a decent amount of time forming habits in a tri gear, then make the move to tail wheel.
Click to expand...


My experience may apply to your question of NG habits and the impact on TW flying. Kinda comes in two parts:

I first flew a J-3 when working on my commercial ticket...actually took part of my CPL check ride in the Cub (the Designated Examiner was an old, I mean "seasoned", AAC instructor from WWII, and we had a lot of fun...it was a cool check ride)(we flew a Cardinal for the "gear-up, gear-down portion of the check ride). Though I was still pretty low time then, the TW/NG transition actually built on skills (stick and rudder awareness, etc.) and I found flying my first complex airplane and first TW airplane very complimentary...different yes, but the challenges of each (hopefully) made me a little better pilot. And it was a ton of fun. I flew more TW airplanes in college, then was away from TW flying for way longer than I wanted to be, flying in the Navy and in corporate and airline jobs.

Fast forward more years than I care to admit, and, having never lost the love of TW flying, I bought an RV-6 last year. I did a very thorough check out with the seller (Rocketboy...college bud and earlier poster in this thread...his comments are right on!) as well as some transition training with another RV CFI in his airplane. Once again I've found the (somewhat) unique challenges of TW flying to be very complimentary to my other flying (still flying jets for a living). I don't think that years of NG-only flying developed any bad habits (hopefully a professional approach to all flying and high personal standards have minimized the bad habits! :)) or have made it more difficult to re-transition. It's been nothing but fun, fun, fun!

I don't think that TW pilots are better than NG pilots, or that NG pilots inherently develop bad habits that make transitioning to TW flying more difficult and/or dangerous. On the contrary, any pilot that accepts the challenge of consistent and precise flying will excel in either environment, and both become safer and more enjoyable. TW flying may develop an additional (or perhaps better stated, slightly different) set of skills...I feel my feet are a bit "smarter" from the exposure to "CG-behind-the-mains" flying, but that's just my self-evaluation.

I say (IMHO) that if you want to try it, go for it! Apply what you know, approach it with the same enthusiasm, professionalism, and respect for safety required by all of aviation, let it add to your piloting bag o' tricks, and enjoy it. If it turns out not to be your thing, no harm, no foul...lot's of great pilots just like NG airplanes better, and there sure isn't anything wrong with that...it's still flying and we're all brother and sister pilots. It's all good!

Have fun! :D

Cheers,

Bob Mills
"Rocket" RV-6
N600SS
4SD
 
Last edited:
In summation,

"Taildragger pilots are just plane COOL!"


Bob


(must admit tho an F-18 would look pretty silly with a tailwheel)
 
And correct me if I'm wrong (wait for it) ... the ONLY reason the military moved away from tailwheel planes is because the jet exhaust kept setting the runwa on fire .... :p

g
 
Cool...

Rocketboy said:
In summation,

"Taildragger pilots are just plane COOL!"


Bob


(must admit tho an F-18 would look pretty silly with a tailwheel)
Click to expand...

Gotta say, I would have liked to have flown an taildragger off a carrier with the cockpit thrown open...now that was cool! :cool:
 
Rocketboy said:
In summation,

"Taildragger pilots are just plane COOL!"


Bob


(must admit tho an F-18 would look pretty silly with a tailwheel)
Click to expand...

I thought Fonzi was cool... in the 60's !;)

IMHO, the whole TD controversy is simply a misdirected argument about style vs substance. Get what you want and live with your choice. :D Personally, I could care less what anyone else picks for themselves.

That said, I have to admit that I dont really understand why someone would choose something so antiquated when it is more difficult and dangerous, limits visibility when it is most important, and lowers possible trade-in values simply because they think it looks "cool".
 
I thought Fonzi was cool... in the 60's !;)

IMHO, the whole TD controversy is simply a misdirected argument about style vs substance. Get what you want and live with your choice. :D Personally, I could care less what anyone else picks for themselves.

That said, I have to admit that I dont really understand why someone would choose something so antiquated when it is more difficult and dangerous, limits visibility when it is most important, and lowers possible trade-in values simply because they think it looks "cool".
Click to expand...

I have to admit that I dont really understand why someone would choose something that limits the types of planes they could fly and most important to me, limits the type of surface to land on.

If I ever have to make a forced landing, I'll have enough things to worry about besides pole vaulting over a rough patch in a field, besides they look cool...
 
I have been waiting for some one to bring this up, and that is the safety aspect of the nose wheel aircraft. There is no doubt that your odds of ground looping a TD aircraft are higher than with a nose gear. However the Van's nose gear aircraft have been known to flip on to their back occasionally when operating on non paved surfaces. Past threads have shown that it also happens to good experienced pilots as well as those with few hours. In my opinion this tips the safety factor back to give the tail wheel RVs the advantage. You can count on a flip over if you do a forced landing with these nose wheel aircraft and I am just not comfortable with those odds. I have experienced a forced landing with my RV4, and while the engine was toast, the airframe was completely without damage. This was a landing into a soft soy bean field.
 
I was not going to post to this thread. But here I am.
After a couple of hours in my sissy wheel 6A, I quickly found the new taildragger RV-8 to be more of a challenge to fly. I happen to enjoy challenging things. Anyone can take the easy route. I do agree the sissy wheel is safer and has visibility advantages. But for me the absolute satisfaction I get out of man handling my tailwheel is worth the risk. I have never felt that level of satisfaction out of the sissy wheel.

If all I desired was a Sunday flyer to lunch, the sissy wheel would be just fine. But thats not me. But I like the challenge. I like the feel, I like the hard work, I like having to think about what Im doing. I love a difficuly gusty crosswind that leaves others in the hanger.
 
Kahuna said:
I was not going to post to this thread. But here I am.
After a couple of hours in my sissy wheel 6A, I quickly found the new taildragger RV-8 to be more of a challenge to fly. I happen to enjoy challenging things. Anyone can take the easy route. I do agree the sissy wheel is safer and has visibility advantages. But for me the absolute satisfaction I get out of man handling my tailwheel is worth the risk. I have never felt that level of satisfaction out of the sissy wheel.

If all I desired was a Sunday flyer to lunch, the sissy wheel would be just fine. But thats not me. But I like the challenge. I like the feel, I like the hard work, I like having to think about what Im doing. I love a difficuly gusty crosswind that leaves others in the hanger.
Click to expand...

What Kahuna said....

I absolutely L.O.V.E. the feeling inside after nailing a particularly spirited crosswind landing. Not two weeks ago I did (10) touch-n-gos on a crosswindy day. Insert JFK quote "we do it because it is hard" here...:D

I love formation, I love acro, I love a hard crosswind landing....hey, this is starting to sound like a scene from Bull Durham!

But, I do love my tailwheel...and I'd do it just the same again.

b,
d
 
So historically speaking, which is worse and/or happens more often... a ground loop or bent strut? Which is more likely, finding an unexpectedly strong cross wind or a hitting a bad hole in a runway? FWIW, I'd be surprised if either turn out to be significant problems in the RV world.

Bigger deals for me is that the front wheel layout allows a larger prop diameter and the landing visibility differences. The mechanical strut problem can be fixed,or at least minimized, in a number of ways; I'm not so sure the pilot skill related ground loop problem can.

As for looks, I like the looks of TD tandems, especially on the longer RV-8; I prefer the front wheel on the side-by-sides.
 
Last edited:
Low n Slow said:
I have to admit that I dont really understand why someone would choose something that limits the types of planes they could fly and most important to me, limits the type of surface to land on.

If I ever have to make a forced landing, I'll have enough things to worry about besides pole vaulting over a rough patch in a field, besides they look cool...
Click to expand...

I know of "three" tail dragging RV's, locally, that flipped over in forced field landings. Since these are around here, how many have flipped elsewhere?

Let's face the facts. Tailwheel RV's with small diameter tires and wheel pants aren't exactly bush planes! And who is going to fly an RV pantless all the time, in case of an off runway landing? :D

Yes, the tail wheel RV does have a small advantage over the nosewheel variety for slightly rougher landing strips. But it's been very noticeable that several contributors to this forum, have flown their "A" models off grass strips for years, with no problems.

For back country, I want a nice high wing and large diameter tires. There's a bunch of them in hangars surrounding my RV. These include Aviat Huskys, tail wheel Cessna's, Maules, Super Cub's, and Cub clones. These are "rough landing" planes that are built for the purpose. RV's with "dinky" little wheels and tires are not! They just GO FASTER!

L.Adamson -- RV6A
 
exactly, I have a friend with an 8 and he really wants to get back to a citabrea or like because he is afraid to go into back country fields, he said the tires are too small and the pants cause a problem also. He really likes my kitfox, so do I. So with my fast plane, it doesn't matter if it's front or back wheel. Now my kitfox, I'm keeping that, it's tail wheel, too much fun. As far as the airplane choice, doesn't matter on where the little wheel is, once it's off the ground the airplane doesn't know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top