If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
pj
Think we are almost saying the same thing. G On my last TW ck out I had him shoot a 'couple' of wheel landings and he did ok. I then spent the rest of the time on three point landings. Seems to me I complied with the FAR. It doesn't say that the student has to shoot the same number of wheel and 3 pt landings. Guess when I touch the ground I want to be able to steer the aircraft with the tail wheel and not just fan the rudder. If I make a wheely and bird is drifting more than rudder will hold and I tap a brake, I could well get a prop or ground loop if tail wheel is not on ground? Enough. Go lay in some of Chucks Muzzleloader for the winter up there. See you at Ice out ) Big John On Tue, 9 Dec 2003 14:39:24 -0800, "PJ" pj at offairport dot com wrote: Hi again John, It seems to me that you have turned this into an argument of whether we as instructors should be teaching 3 point or wheel landings. That was NEVER my point nor my intentions. My point, as I've attempted to explain twice before, is that we as instructors must follow the FARs and teach BOTH 3 point AND wheel landings BEFORE ever signing off a tailwheel endorsement. When I said 'I prefer wheel landings, I never said I didn't teach 3 point landings. I was simply responding to your comment about 'wondering what pilots in Alaska thought about wheel landings". You go ahead and teach your 3 point and I will continue teaching both. That is all. PJ |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
And believe me, one place you don't want to be for very long in the winter time in Alaska, is in the back seat of a Cub. After a couple instances of engines quitting in the flare etc, we aren't allowed to fly if the temp is under 20 deg F. Even at that, my flying kit includes a mostly-used roll of duct tape, to seal the quarter-inch gap between the door-window and the frame. all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
my flying kit includes a mostly-used roll of duct tape,
No kidding Dan, Some times it seems like half the cubs in Alaska have more duct tape on them than fabric. PJ -- =============== Reply to: pj at offairport dot com =============== Here's to the duck that swam a lake and never lost a feather, May sometime another year, we all be back together. J.J.W. ========================================= "Cub Driver" wrote in message ... And believe me, one place you don't want to be for very long in the winter time in Alaska, is in the back seat of a Cub. After a couple instances of engines quitting in the flare etc, we aren't allowed to fly if the temp is under 20 deg F. Even at that, my flying kit includes a mostly-used roll of duct tape, to seal the quarter-inch gap between the door-window and the frame. all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
And Hartford, Wisconsin KHXF. With about 75 airplanes based at Hartford,
over 90 percent are taildraggers. Last Cub count was over 20. Also include several Waco's, Stearmans, a TravelAir, an Eaglerock, several SuperCruisers, Champs, C-120s, 140s, 170s, Pitts and a bunch of other homebuilts. Basically all the popular taildraggers with a spattering of some real gems. -- Jim Burns III Remove "nospam" to reply "Cub Driver" wrote in message ... Thanks for the pointer. I'll add it to my list of Cub-friendly airports www.pipercubforum.com/friendly.htm Dan, you can also add Red Stewart Airfield (40I), Waynesville Ohio. Cubs, Champs, Stearman. Thanks! Anyone else? all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Ha! I agree with you!! I'm loving every minute of it and dieing to get more
time and more experience. My instructor and long time friend told me "you know, we aren't going to do this in 1 day and when we are done, by no means does it mean that you've developed the skills and experience to throw a student in the front seat of this thing!" I couldn't agree with him more, in some ways I feel like I'm soloing all over again. -- Jim Burns III Remove "nospam" to reply "Bob Fry" wrote in message ... "Jim" writes: Congrats! I've been working on my TW endorsement in a SuperCub and the only thing left to work on is crosswinds. And congrats to you...but I must say, that's sort of like saying "I'm working on my PPL and the only thing left is solo." |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
EDR wrote in message ...
If you use the "look to the side method", how do you correct for drift? Depends on the plane. In the J-3 I keep the center line under the main at all times. Its kind of my personal challenge, to always have the main in the middle of the painted center line. I usually just slip it until I get down to about 2 feet, so its really only the flare that I'm concerned with. How far away from the aircraft do you look? Not sure I understand the question. I usually have 1/2 a face full of cowling and 1/2 a face full of runway ahead of me with cylinders somewhat in the way. Do you look at the upwind or downwind side? Depends on which side is most likely to have something jump out in front of me. I'll use either side. In most of these planes, if you don't bring them in too hot, the flare only lasts a couple seconds at most. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
(Michael) wrote in message . com...
(Robert M. Gary) wrote In most of these planes, if you don't bring them in too hot, the flare only lasts a couple seconds at most. In most of what planes? In the Cub, I agree with you. It CAN be landed by looking out the side, and in fact that's how I was taught to land it. In the Cub, you can actually see the main gear by looking out the side. Basically, there are the "Look to the side" people and the "Look straight ahead and use peripheral vision" people. I've been taught both ways (with the "Look to the side" method being taught first), have used both ways, and I'm now squarely in the "Look straight ahead and use peripheral vision" camp. One particular airplane made me a believer. Michael Your post indicates obvious experience with a number of aircraft. But, it also sounds like you are using both "straight ahead, and peripheral vision" methods. Even if unconciously? As with any flight instruction, there are those who have their own tried and true method that works for them but in many cases it is fairly restricted either by aircraft type or pilot experience. Just as a WAG (wild assed guess) I've flown 20-30 different types of tailwheel aircraft with more than casual or courtesy flights. Read that as "worked" them. Each of them required their own particular techniques as you point out. You can't just point it ahead and hope! A number of the aircraft I've flown are radial engined which means a lot of iron and aluminum out in front and restricting view on the ground. Once that tail comes up, the view improves but not always a lot?! When you operate off a strip that is barely as wide as your landing gear track you simply have to be good or you end up in the bushes/trees/rocks/buildings/water/etc,etc. Like you say, there is no one way to do it. Anyone who argues with that is a fool and headed for disaster. 12,000 doing crop duster work and another 10,000 doing other stuff. That airplane was the Starduster Too. Due to the mission as well as some design quirks (it's a homebuilt) it needed to come down final at 90-95 mph. Touchdown would occur around 70-75 (my best guess) in the three point attitude. Wheel landings were impossible - even if you pushed the stick full forward, the tailwheel would still come down immediately. Full stall in free air was just over 60 mph. The first instructor to try to check me out in the plane was of the "Look to the side" school, and tried to teach me that way. All he really succeeded in doing two hours was convincing me the plane was unsafe. I took another shot with another instructor a while later, and he taught me the "Look straight ahead and use peripheral vision" method. In 90 minutes I soloed the airplane. He also explained that looking out to the side does work with some taildraggers, but not others. For example, (at least according to him) nobody lands a Pitts by looking out to the side. I tried looking out the side of teh 'Duster a couple of times on landing, and discovered that it just doesn't work. You can't get enough attitude and altitude cues to flare properly. Visibility is terrible - there is no way to see the main gear, or much of anything else. I suppose that without that airplane (and the instructor who taught me to fly it) I would still be looking out to the side - but I now consider it to be an inferior method of limited application. Michael |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Tailwheel ID | R. Mueller | Aviation Marketplace | 2 | February 5th 08 10:25 PM |
Tailwheel question | Steve B | Aerobatics | 4 | January 30th 04 03:35 AM |
Advice on flying Pitts with Haigh Locking Tailwheel | Ditch | Home Built | 19 | January 4th 04 10:18 PM |
Tailwheel tires | Dan Thomas | Piloting | 10 | November 26th 03 02:53 PM |
homebuilt tailwheel | Del Rawlins | Home Built | 7 | November 9th 03 02:34 AM |