My Ground Loop

In article , Cub Driver
usenet AT danford DOT net says...

2,600' of runway - can't see how you could run out of room - short of
performing 5 T&G's on it. How do you get on on 700' runways?

Pay no attention to this comment, my friend.

Actually... my apologies - over here in kiwiland RWY's are in *meters* -
and even though I typed my reply in feet (') - my brain was engaged in
meters. So sorry 'bout that - Reid and Julie.

I'm fairly used to landing on 'shortish' fields - as we have many of 'em
here. Hell.. even the grass strip at NZCH (international) is pretty
short - and has caught many a student out trying touch and goes after
landing halfway down it Further, there's a farmers fence at the end
of it - it's caught a few planes in it over the years.

http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZCH_51.1_51.2.pdf

--
Duncan

Thanks for the story. I've never flown in a Clipper but I think it has
the nicest lines of all the short wing Pipers. Just real nice.

It occurs to me how forgiving grass is and unforgiving hard surfaces can
be for us butt draggers.

The lesson for me is to learn to go around on occassion if things aren't
lining up right. I just can't the glider thing out of me. I don't
think I've aborted a landing once in 1000+ hrs in the Maule. That's wrong.

Thanks.

Reid & Julie Baldwin wrote:
I have heard it said that there are two types of tailwheel pilots: those
that have ground looped and those that will. A week ago, I graduated from
the latter category into the former category. There was no shirt ripping
ceremony for this milestone. Fortunately, there was also no torn flesh or
bent metal. I post the story here so others can share my lessons learned.

I've probably mentioned this before, but my first "trip into the weeds" was
my graduation when getting my tailwheel endorsement from our long time ag
pilot friend and mentor.

He'd been putting me in ever increasing difficult situations with the
SuperCub, culminating with severe crosswind landings... and I mean severe.
29 knots 90 degrees to the runway. Most people couldn't believe we were out
in those winds, but I had several witnesses. If you think your primary
instructor ever told you to use "more right rudder" you should have heard my
instructor scream about getting that wing down and to plant that wheel on
the ground... all the rudder and brake you need, then get this thing pointed
into the wind as we slow to a stop!! 10 degrees F out, 29knot winds, and I
was sweating so bad I wished I'd left my coat at home.

Well... after two or three successful landings, it was off to the races.
Didn't get the upwind wing low enough, too much speed, not enough rudder,
not enough toe brake, a milli-second later we weather veined into the wind
and exited the runway between two runway lights. 4" of snow helped slow us
down and I got it going straight again, then hit the power and we were back
in the air after a bit. After we came around and landed on an upwind
runway, we talked over what happened and he told me that I'd now seen most
things that can happen when flying a taildragger so he'd sign me off. We
then took off for home, climbed up to 3000 feet, did some slow flight and he
let me fly backwards for the first time.

The next day I got some pretty good ribbing from my friends who'd seen the
huge plume of snow and a little red and white SuperCub emerge from the cloud
in a 45 degree crab. They said it looked like something out of a crazy
movie and the airport manager who'd seen the tracks wondered if somebody
with an ATV had been out playing in the snow.

Jim

Maule Driver wrote:

I don't
think I've aborted a landing once in 1000+ hrs in the Maule.

My one and only (so far) ground loop came about because I failed to abort a
landing when I should've. When the trees got about 60' away, I locked the right
brake, and she came around about 120 degrees. Got her stopped, though.

Years later, I found grass trapped in the bead of the left tire when I changed it.

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

My one and only (so far) ground loop came about because I failed to abort
a
landing when I should've. When the trees got about 60' away, I locked the
right brake, and she came around about 120 degrees. Got her stopped,
though.

Years later, I found grass trapped in the bead of the left tire when I
changed it.

George Patterson

In 700 hours of flying my Luscombe, I have never used the brake for landing,
and I've landed in 25 mph direct crosswinds on pavement. We're taught never
to use brake as our airplanes are prone to flipping (and I've seen it
happen).

What's the difference do you think?

Deb

--
1946 Luscombe 8A (his)
1948 Luscombe 8E (hers)
1954 Cessna 195B, restoring (ours)

I ground looped the Chief once. Not a fun situation to not feel like
you are in control. I had touched down and at about 5 mph I hit the
left rudder to turn off the runway. The plane went left, then too far
left (which is normal for any taildragger). When I hit the right rudder
to stop the turn it went to the floor and the plane kept going left. I
got about 270 degrees of a turn before I got my feet up on the heel
brake to tap the right brake. It was kind of sur-real going around in
circles slowly. Luckily the wheel never really left the ground and the
wing didn't touch. It turned out the locking pin in the tail had worn
out so the tailwheel didn't engage when aligned with the rudder. Until
I slowed to 5 mph I was successfully steering with the rudder (w/o
tailwheel).

-Robert

Deborah McFarland wrote:
My one and only (so far) ground loop came about because I failed to abort
a
landing when I should've. When the trees got about 60' away, I locked the
right brake, and she came around about 120 degrees. Got her stopped,
though.

Years later, I found grass trapped in the bead of the left tire when I
changed it.

George Patterson

In 700 hours of flying my Luscombe, I have never used the brake for landing,
and I've landed in 25 mph direct crosswinds on pavement. We're taught never
to use brake as our airplanes are prone to flipping (and I've seen it
happen).

What's the difference do you think?

Deb
Different aircraft. I've never flown a Luscombe (and would love to) but
I think it is a much lighter aircraft than the Maule. Plus it is
simply different.

The whole wheelie versus 3 point debate always seems to come down to,
"different a/c are different". My Maule never needs to be 2 pointed due
to wind conditions. It is always easier to handle landings in 3 point
mode, no matter what the wind. Of course reflex flaps give you a lot of
different configurations for 3 point landings. I've watched a dozen
pilots do thousands of Cessna Bird Dog landings. Everyone I remember
was a 2 pointer - of course tow pilots stay very proficient in landings.

Regarding brakes - I don't know nothing about other a/c but the Maule
definitely needs brakes in high xwind situations - just for that last 5
mph of rolling speed at the end of the landing - or the beginning of the
TO - I'm talking 25+ direct xwinds. Plus, the brakes can be used very
effectively to avoid an immenent ground loop - Ray told me, then had to
demo it, then I used it a couple of times. If you let things go to far,
you can simply run out of yoke and rudder but a good stab on the brake
can still bring all back around - thank goodness!

I watched a Luscombe doing T&Gs at Southern Pines NC one calm day. They
were landing on one wheel, pulling up 6', then landing on the other.
Didn't really know you could do that. I tried it and could do it but
I'm sure the Luscombe looked more graceful doing it. I think the Maule
is just heavier all around.

"Private" wrote in message
news:WSRif.649892$tl2.12997@pd7tw3no...

"zatatime" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 21:34:12 -0500, "Reid & Julie Baldwin"
wrote:

I took some advice to change my landing technique and carry
some power through the flare instead of cutting power as soon as I had
the
runway made.


Thanks for the story. I hope you're re-thinking the above advice at
this point. Carrying power into the flare isn't necessary, extends
your landing distance, and can get you in trouble as you found out.
Also in x-wind conditions like you describe, a three point landing is
a better idea in my opinion. You talked about wanting to get the tail

Depends on the airplane, depends on the brakes.



I think I see the three point vs. wheelie thread coming around again,
which is ok by me as it is usually a good one.

Ok, here we go!

I will comment that none of my better tailwheel instructors were fans of
wheel landings (for light aircraft) and the best of them refused to teach
wheelies at all. They agreed that wheelies usually meant too fast, with
too much energy, needing too much rollout and with too little authority.
The tail has to come down sooner or later, and a pilot's best friend is a
firmly planted steerable tailwheel.

Depending on the airplane, and depending on the brakes, this is either 100%
Gospel or 100% B.S. or somewhere inbetween.

I learned to fly in a C-120 with Cleveland toe brakes - and nearly always
did wheelies because they were so much easier and I had so much more control
before and after touchdown.

I've put it into narrow paved strips with crosswinds strong enough to make
the windsock look like it was made of iron.
The trick was to come down hot and get the mains solidly planted on the
ground. None of that floating around at low speeds with mushy controls
trying to not get blown off the runway stuff. Then, with the mains planted
(a good nudge forward on the wheel, eh?) you had all the control you could
ever want with the toe brakes. Set the tail down whenever - it's not like
the tailwheel had enough "power" to keep things straight on a blustery day
anyhow.

Too much rollout? Nah. ALWAYS made the first turn off beause I never found
myself floating down the runway waiting for a three point to happen. :-)

I was told, by a source that I consider reliable, that the way to make the
absolute shortest landing possible in a DC-3 is to wheel it on, push the
wheel _way_ forward to get the tail up and put a lot of force on the mains
so they don't lock up when you stand on the brakes, and to generate lots of
drag from the wing generating "negitive" lift. Never had a chance to try it
myself though :-(


The only time I have ever felt that I was just along for the ride was on
my second (ever) solo (no instructor in backseat = more forward CG)
landing (PA18) where I got caught with full flaps (shadowed rudder) and
the tailwheel not fully planted. A blast of power helped and I did not
ground loop but did talk with alligators, and had to explain how I got mud
on the underside of the wings (no wheel pants).

Different airplane, different brakes.

YMMV.

--
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
The Sea Hawk At WowWay D0t Com

"Maule Driver" wrote in message
om...
Deborah McFarland wrote:
My one and only (so far) ground loop came about because I failed to abort
a
landing when I should've. When the trees got about 60' away, I locked the
right brake, and she came around about 120 degrees. Got her stopped,
though.

Years later, I found grass trapped in the bead of the left tire when I
changed it.

George Patterson

In 700 hours of flying my Luscombe, I have never used the brake for
landing, and I've landed in 25 mph direct crosswinds on pavement. We're
taught never to use brake as our airplanes are prone to flipping (and
I've seen it happen).

What's the difference do you think?

Deb

Different aircraft.

Yea, what he said.

But, if you never use the brakes, how do you do fun things like coming to a
complete stop with the tail still in the air?
(Well, it's fun at first, but then when the tail drops with a bang, you
realize it's not something you want to do a lot...)

--
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
The Sea Hawk At WowWay D0t Com

On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:40:13 GMT, Maule Driver
wrote:


Different aircraft. I've never flown a Luscombe (and would love to) but
I think it is a much lighter aircraft than the Maule. Plus it is
simply different.

I've seen a Luscombe stand on its nose when the owner's spouse used
both brakes at once. After the A/C was repaired, I got checked out in
it and the owner/CFII taught me to apply the brakes alternately.

I put about 60 hours on that plane until I wrecked it. Gusty X-winds.
(The point of the flight had been to practice X-winds, which I was
pretty competent at handling.) Got 2 wheels on the ground and it
started to weathercock as the tail was coming down. (I was taught to
follw the tail down with the stick.)

I applied power for a go-around (plenty of runway), but with the gear
unloaded, I got blown sideways into the dirt off the side of the
runway before I could establish a slip or crab to counter the X-wind.
Left wheel fairing (a pointy one from a 172, not a stock Luscombe
fairing) hit a hummock and the plane pivoted horizontally around that.
Bent the fuselage aft of the cabin structure.

The controller in the tower said he'd thought I had it made. Less
than a foot more of altitude and I would have. Or I could have
accepted the lesser damage that would have accompanied a groundloop.

What would the right decision have been?

Don