Texas Taildraggers

xyzzy wrote:

If the Aviation Consumer reviews of Maule planes are any indication,
odss are good that it wasn't painted properly. That has been
consistently cited as a problem with Maules.

Any Maule older than 1996 will not have been painted properly and any Maule made
in 1997 or '98 may not have been (Belford had odd ideas on the matter and the
factory used up old stocks of paint after he died in '95). The only question is
whether an older Maule has been repainted and, if so, how good that job was.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

George Patterson writes:

xyzzy wrote:
If the Aviation Consumer reviews of Maule planes are any indication,
odss are good that it wasn't painted properly. That has been
consistently cited as a problem with Maules.

Any Maule older than 1996 will not have been painted properly and any
Maule made in 1997 or '98 may not have been (Belford had odd ideas on
the matter and the factory used up old stocks of paint after he died
in '95). The only question is whether an older Maule has been
repainted and, if so, how good that job was.

I was going to spend = $30k on a taildragger. Looking around, I don't
think a Maule of any vintage, repainted or not, would fit that budget,
unless I wanted to buy a project. A partnership could work, if I'd be
able to find a share for sale locally.

Ari.

--
Elections only count as free and trials as fair if you can lose money
betting on the outcome.

I was going to spend = $30k on a taildragger.

Your realistic options, if you want to stick to metal (and lacking a
hangar, I certainly would) are a C-120 or C-140 (many are now
all-metal), a Luscombe, a metallized short wing Piper (Pacer, Clipper,
etc - there are a few out there), and the oddball conversions. There
are C-150's and Yankees converted to tailwheel. There are also some
experimental options.

Other than just flying around (which all of them will do) what is your
actual mission profile?

Rough/short strips? Long trips? What made you choose the Texas
Taildragger to begin with?

Michael

"Michael" writes:

I was going to spend = $30k on a taildragger.

Your realistic options, if you want to stick to metal (and lacking a
hangar, I certainly would) are a C-120 or C-140 (many are now
all-metal), a Luscombe, a metallized short wing Piper (Pacer, Clipper,
etc - there are a few out there), and the oddball conversions. There
are C-150's and Yankees converted to tailwheel. There are also some
experimental options.

Other than just flying around (which all of them will do) what is your
actual mission profile?

Rough/short strips? Long trips? What made you choose the Texas
Taildragger to begin with?

I was going through my logbook, and I realized that 2/3 of my PIC time
over the last year was taking friends on tours of the SF Bay. I want a
taildragger because I want to up keep proficiency my, and because
they are more fun (e.i. fewer people have them). My thinking is that
anything I can rent, I'm better off renting than owning. That includes
1X2 Cessnas, Cherokee-derived Pipers and Citabrias.

I'm buying my first airplane; I want to make sure I don't bite off
more than I can chew in terms of TCO. I've never had to deal with
aircraft maintenance, and even though I wan to learn, my experience
right now is limited to clearing fouled plugs. As far as certified
taildraggers go, TTs are about the least demanding in maintenance,
parts and mechanics AFAICT, followed closely by 120/140. I also like
the side-by-side seating - nice when you're flying with a friend you
want to talk to, though not an absolute requirement. I should also
mention that I'm 6'5" (though skinny so I weigh the FAA-legal 170lbs)

I'm not set on a TT, it just seemed to fit the bill. I've heard of
tailwheel Yankees, but have never see one. A TT is a C-150/152
converted to TW, right? I've never flown a Luscombe, but it would
probably work if I find one in good shape within the budget. You also
mention experimentals. My anecdotal experience with them suggests
that the high-quality ones are priced at least as expensively as
certified airplanes, and the affordable examples often show average
workmanship. (I've been an EAA member since 1993 but never got serious
enough about buy an experimental to make a statement here)

Ari.

--
Elections only count as free and trials as fair if you can lose money
betting on the outcome.

A TT is a C-150/152
converted to TW, right?

Yup.

I should also
mention that I'm 6'5" (though skinny so I weigh the FAA-legal 170lbs).

You'd better see if you can get into a 150. The bottom of the panel
will be banging your legs and your head will be close to the ceiling.
We had 150s as trainers and tall guys didn't like them.

Dan