I've been in a couple of planes where without the brakes the thing
accelerates too much. The F-16 comes to mind, where without intermittent
braking it picks up too much speed, and braking on landing is pretty much
SOP.

My Baron needs occasional braking on taxi, otherwise below around 1000rpm
the oil pressure drops too low. My friend's turbine Bonanza needs to use
beta during taxi or the brakes to keep from picking up too much speed.

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
On Sep 15, 2:44 pm, "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote:
I'm deligthted to see I'm managing to get some arguments and
discussion going. And if you notice, No Profanity?
I challenge my students to learn to taxi without brakes. and I come
down hard if they beat up the airplane with unecessary braking instead
of staying ahead of the airplane. (sometimes even with profanity! Can
you imagine that?)
How about you? If you had to pay for the brakes, tires, and
maintenance, would YOU beat up the airplane?
Ol S&B

I agree completely, (and without cussing :-)

I see you are naturally getting replies from the Grumman and Cherokee
folks :-) But your point is well made. The way I would present this
issue is to simply say that brakes are put on the airplane to hold it
for the run up check and for use ONLY when your pre-planned use of
aerodynamic forces available to you, or your steering capabilities
won't make the necessary change in direction.
In other words, you shouldn't be using them on takeoff, landing, and
even while taxiing if your planning is adequate for the situation.
I like the general rule that dictates that brakes on an airplane
should be used as little as possible.

Dudley Henriques