One, big sh*t-eating grin...!

John,

The second answer is, the instructor was referring to controlling the
aircraft in flight. In a taildragger, you lead a turn with rudder before
adding the aileron.


You still don't get Bob's point, I'm afraid. The point is: How would the
air and the plane "know" that it's a taildragger, once the plane is flying?
And thusly, how would the plane "know" to behave differently in the air
because it has a different wheel (!) configuration?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

In article ,
Thomas Borchert wrote:

You still don't get Bob's point, I'm afraid. The point is: How would the
air and the plane "know" that it's a taildragger, once the plane is flying?
And thusly, how would the plane "know" to behave differently in the air
because it has a different wheel (!) configuration?

It's the way the airplanes were designed then and now.
Alot of it has to do with adverse yaw and how the ailerons were hinged
then compared to how they are hinged now.
Find an old Champ and see how much of the forward portion of the aileron
extends above/below the wing surface when the aileron is deflected down
on the upgoing wing/down on the down going wing.

I don't think so. Find a C-170 and set it next to a C-172 and compare the
two. Besides, adverse yaw is not WHEN you apply rudder to compensate for it
but HOW MUCH. Again, get yourself some decent taildragger instruction.

Jim



"john smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Thomas Borchert wrote:

You still don't get Bob's point, I'm afraid. The point is: How would the
air and the plane "know" that it's a taildragger, once the plane is
flying?
And thusly, how would the plane "know" to behave differently in the air
because it has a different wheel (!) configuration?

It's the way the airplanes were designed then and now.
Alot of it has to do with adverse yaw and how the ailerons were hinged
then compared to how they are hinged now.
Find an old Champ and see how much of the forward portion of the aileron
extends above/below the wing surface when the aileron is deflected down
on the upgoing wing/down on the down going wing.

"RST Engineering" wrote in message
...
I don't think so. Find a C-170 and set it next to a C-172 and compare the
two. Besides, adverse yaw is not WHEN you apply rudder to compensate for
it but HOW MUCH. Again, get yourself some decent taildragger instruction.

Are there any certified planes (or even experimental) that need zero rudder
input to do a coordinated turn?
--
Jim in NC

Rudder pedalless Ercouples come quickly to mind.

Jim

--
"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in
a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, with chocolate in one hand and wine in
the other, loudly proclaiming 'WOO HOO What a Ride!'"
--Unknown
"Morgans" wrote in message
...



Are there any certified planes (or even experimental) that need zero
rudder input to do a coordinated turn?
--
Jim in NC

"RST Engineering" wrote in message
...
Rudder pedalless Ercouples come quickly to mind.

You know, I thought about tossing that name down, ad a "besides Recoups" and
decided that they didn't count, because they don't have rudder pedals, so
there is no option to use or not to use.

Any others? It would seem like someone could make it possible with the
right combination of Frieze ailerons, and differential, or some other
combinations.
--
Jim in NC