On Jul 8, 9:31*am, Stealth Pilot
wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 05:43:30 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
Other than the 'holier than thou' aspects of taildraggers and their
pilots, what are their real advantages? Has it to do with prop
clearance on unimproved fields, or fatter mains being better in that
same environment? Does anyone know if, with the same level of
experience pilots, they have a better or worse accident record when
compared to airplanes of the same general size that have the tailwheel
under the engine?

statistics are that the introduction of the nose wheel significantly
reduced accident rates.

I flew nose wheel aircraft in my early years then did a tailwheel
endorsement in a bugger of an aircraft to land, the Auster.
Then I bough a Tailwind through a long convoluted process and have
flown it ever since.

first misconception is that only tailwheel aircraft ground loop. if
you land on the nosewheel you can experience a far far more viscious
ground loop than you'll ever see in a taildragger.

your question on experience levels misses something.
taking a Cessna 150 as the datum point, an Auster is a quantum leap
harder to land and takeoff well. in the air both are superb to fly.
the tailwind is a quantum harder again to fly.
so what is lost in the details is that there arent as equally as
experienced pilots flying both. the taildragger pilot has had to
improve his general level of piloting considerably to appear mediocre
in a taildragger.

I love flying Cessnas, but having made the transition to Austers and
the W8 Tailwind I simply wouldnt want to not fly the taildraggers.
Snicking the daisies in the flare in a taildragger on a grass strip is
just the greatest satisfaction.

btw keep that mooney of yours on the bitumen or you'll prang it.

(now let me get this right. you are one of the first wave decoys
attacking this newsgroup arent you? )
Stealth Pilot

I've no intention of landing my airplane on anything but hard
surfaces, thanks. My taildragger time has been limited to a few hours
in a real Piper Cub, and that airplane does not do a good job in
satisfying my mission requirements for GA (300 to 700 mile trips for
business). As for your parenthetical remark -- I wonder what
distortions in my posts you might have made to come to that
conclusion?
The several M words and Bertie when diverted are doing a good enough
job diluting the quality of this newsgroup.