Have no experience, but kind of curious too.

I was under the impression that things that come into play for
conventional gear is gyroscopic motion on the propeller when the tail
comes up or drops on take off and landing, as well as the fact that
since the cg is behind the main gear there is a tenancy for the
airplane to want to ground loop if you don't keep that cg behind them
fairly well with control inputs.

I would think that both floats and skis would not have that same
issue, both due to not having as much pitch up and down on take off
and landings, and due to their cg being over the floats or skis.

But then again I have no idea what I am talking about. Just guessing
and would like someone who actually knows what they are talking about
to chime in heh.

Mike

On May 10, 3:56*pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
"birdog" wrote:
Today, maybe tail-draggers have no legitimate redeeming value, except
for bush piloting, since virtually everyone flies from tarmac to
tarmac.

Perhaps one other possible redeeming value might be in emergency landings
on unknown surfaces. I've read accident reports where there were fatalities
when the nose wheel of a plane dug in and the plane flipped.

I'm also curious to know if anyone can give first-hand information on
whether landing on skis or floats is more like landing on conventional gear
or tricycle gear? For several reasons I've assumed that it is more like
landing on tricycle gear, but maybe that is incorrect.