Tailwheel conversion

[Tango Oscar]

Recently, my syndicate owned a/c was involved in a landing acccident, which has rendered it U/S for a few weeks at the least. Rather than sit around feeling sorry for myself, that I'm paying monthly fees, and can't go flying, I've decided to broaden my horizon. I did consider some areo's training, including some spinning, simply to improve my handling skills. However, I think I've decided to take some tailwheel differences training, as I've always wanted to fly something nostalgic, like a Moth.

Can has anyone give me an indication of how many hours it might take for the tail wheel conversion, (probably in a Cub), and then how many hours for a checkout in a Moth. I know we are all different, and what may take one person 5 hours may take another 10, but I'm just after a ball park idea. All my flying to date has been on Pipers or Robins.

Thanks in advance.

[MLS-12D]

Good for you for deciding to learn to fly airplanes equipped with 'conventional' undercarriage. You will have fun, learn a lot, and open the door to interesting aircraft that otherwise would be inaccessible to you.:ok:

As you say, everyone is different; but I would say about 10 hours or less should see you solo in a Cub. For what it's worth, it took me five hours to go solo in a Citabria; I consider myself an 'average' pilot.

I haven't flown a Moth (yet), so can't help you on your second question.

[Warped Factor]

The oft quoted 5 hour tailwheel conversion course is probably a reasonable amount of time to get a grasp of the basics of tailwheel flying, not that I'm an expert and in any way qualified to judge :)

There are some good books you can read beforehand, such as Harvey S Plourde's "The Compleat Taildragger Pilot".

As for Tiger Moths, I had about 50 hours total time in tailwheel aircraft (J3 Cub and Chipmunk) when I first joined The Tiger Club and they bravely sent me solo for the first time in one of theirs after 1h 15m dual. On the Tiger Club (http://www.tigerclub.co.uk/) website it says they recommend having at least 20hrs tailwheel experience before flying their Tiger Moths. I can thoroughly recommend them for tailwheel training if you're anywhere near the Headcorn neck of the woods.

That first 15m solo in a Tiger Moth is still one of the high points in my limited flying career :D

WF.

[shortstripper]

Do it straight off in a Moth ... Cambridge Flying Group or the Tiger Club are the best known. It might take a couple of hours more in a Tigermoth rather than a Cub, but then there won't be a second check out for the Tiger!

Average pilot 5-10 hours.

IM

[Zlin526]

In my opinion as a tailwheel instructor on Tiger Moths, it will save you £££'s of money in the long run if you have a reasonable understanding of tailwheel principles before flying the Tiger Moth. Bashing around the circuit in an aeroplane that will cost you twice the going rate of a Cub is not recommended for the bank balance, or indeed very good for the aeroplane. Understand the basics and you will be well prepared for the Tiger Moth, or indeed any tailwheel aeroplane afterwards..

As Warped Factor says, after 20ish hours of Cub/Chipmunk etc, you won't have much of a problem converting to the Tiger. Lets face it, it's not that difficult, just different (and colder in winter:{)! After all, its definately 1920s technology, and handles just like a 1920s aeroplane.

As for the '5hr tailwheel course', I have only ever sent a guy off solo in a Cub from scratch with less than 5 hrs on tailwheels once. He was a natural pilot, who took something like 1:30hrs and off he went. Swine!!

The '5hr tailwheel course' should be re-named the '5hr preparatory course', 'cos it only just scratches the surface for most nosewheel pilots

Warped Factor, we obviously know each other; I may have even sent you off solo!:}

[shortstripper]

Hmmmmmmmm?

When I converted from gliders to power I went to the Cambridge Flying Group. Back then in the late 80's their Tigermoths cost less to fly than the C150's at places like Biggin Hill, Redhill ect, so unless they've suddenly shot up in comparison, they are worth checking out. I'm sure they're probably more expensive than a typical club type in the same area, but if you're from somewhere more expensive they are worth a drive. I'm surprised by Zlin's experience of most pilots taking well over 5 hrs to convert. I did it in less in the Tiger and I know of two or three friends who converted on Cubs ect and had no problems. These were mainly glider pilots though and I guess gliders are very much like taildraggers to fly, so I suppose that may have had an influence.

Whatever you do the conversion on I'm sure you'll have fun anyway so good luck :)

IM

[sycamore]

Z526
"tailwheel instructor on Tiger-Moths"? I suppose you have brakes as well....:confused:

[Zlin526]

Sycamore/Brian,

Real 'tailwheel' pilots dont need brakes...But I hear what you're saying. I hate the term taildragger


Shortstripper,

As I said, in my experience the magic '5 hr course' doesn't normally end in a stude flying off into the sunset solo, but that's maybe because we have higher standards, or the pilots we get coming along to us have bad habits from flying in a 'radio controlled' environment and relying on others to make decisions for them. Unfortunately, a lot of time is spent (wasted?) on basics such as how to trim an aeroplane, accurate speed control etc etc. Flying a new type relies very much on the basic skills, which sadly a lot of pilots seem to have forgotten..

Have a nice day:ok:

[Flyin'Dutch']

If the idea is 'to have a sniff'; most schools with a tailwheel machine will do and so will the 5 hours.

The machines usually operated by these schools tend to be benign and the average pilot will manage to learn to pull off a decent 3 pointer in benign conditions in those 5 hours.

However if you want to become truly proficient in the art of mastering the tailwheel machinery in more challenging conditions and circumstances, make sure you go to a school with good instructors who are true tailwheel afficionados.

They are usually quite easy to spot by asking if they are happy to teach you wheelers as well as three pointers.

Whatever you do have fun!

FD

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

or the pilots we get coming along to us have bad habits from flying in a 'radio controlled' environment and relying on others to make decisions for them.

Not strictly relevant to this thread, but I think the above is a major and very worrying trend in flight training in the last decade or so. Many flying schools seem to see themselves as first level trainers for the air transport transport industry rather than the entry point to flying freedom.

Flying is one of the few real freedoms we can have in this highly-regulated world. It is certainly that freedom and the expectation that you make your own descisions that attracted me to it.

It beats me why so many of today's neophyte pilots are happy to forgo that in favour of having a man on the other end of a radio to tell them what to do. Is it because so many instructors are now themselves on the first rungs of the airline ladder, rather than the retired military or civil pilots who mostly made up the instructor strength in former years - at least in my experience - which may not have been typical?

But if my experience wasn't typical, why the recent increase in 'radio controlled' pilots who are reluctant to make their descisions and in so doing revel in the freedom of flight?

It is perhaps worth considering the old mantra re pilots and air traffic, especially in the 'uncontrolled' VFR environment I'm refering to:

"You're down there because I'm up here. NOT vice versa"

SSD

[Chuck Ellsworth]

With regard to the wheel landing issue.

If your instructor does not teach wheel landings, and make sure you are profficient doing them find another instructor.

And after you learn properly, go back and offer to teach the first one how to fly tailwheel airplanes. :ok:

Chuck

[Whirlybird]

SSD,

I think pilots need to be able to do both, ie fly in both a radio environment and without it. Most newish pilots seem to be better at one than the other, often depending on where they learned to fly.

Actually, some drivers are the same. I'm amazed at how many people from big cities are scared of driving on the one-track mountain roads with sheer drops and few passing places that are normal where I live. Conversely, quite a lot of people in this area are nervous about driving in London or Birmingham.

These all require different skills and practice, and IMHO, one is no better than the other...although I personally prefer both driving and flying in the wilds of North Wales and similar areas - that's why I live here.

[Justiciar]

The '5hr tailwheel course' should be re-named the '5hr preparatory course', 'cos it only just scratches the surface for most nosewheel pilots

Couldn't agree more. I went solo at Clacton after a little more than 5 hours in a Super Cub. Then got checked out on my group's L-4 Cub and then nearly scared byself sh**less by almost loosing it on the take-off roll. Fortunately we got airborn very quickly and paralleled the runway on the climb out.:ugh:

Moral: Don't be in such a hurry, and lighter and less powerful does not necessarily mean easire to control.

Its taken me another 6 hours to feel comfortable and go solo again.

Cambridge, if anyone's interested charges £100 per hour solo and £120 duel. Not bad.

[Warped Factor]

Zlin526 wrote:

Warped Factor, we obviously know each other; I may have even sent you off solo!

That's always possible, want to admit to where you instruct and I'll let you know :D

I also think some a/c are better for learning in than others and in my own humble opinion the lower powered the better.

For me something like a 150hp Super Cub is not ideal for ab initio taildragger training because it gets off the ground too quickly. Of course it will bite if provoked, but you can get away with much more ham footedness than you would be able to in a much lower powered a/c.

If you can learn in something a bit less lively I'd go for that.

All just IMHO of course.

WF.

[Tango Oscar]

Thanks all for your input. I have just called the Tiger Club, and the guy I spoke to was very helpfull and friendly. He suggested it would be cheaper to start off in the Cub, then progress to the Moth as some have posted here, but said I could go straight for the Moth if I prefered.

Apparently, the training is done by 'Check pilots', rather than instructors, so does this mean I'm officially a pax, and can't log the hours until an instructor has signed my logbook ?

I think my current plan is to go for a flight in one of their Moths first. If I like it as much as I think I will, do the initial training in the Cub, before progressing.

Thanks again all.

[FNG]

You are correct in observing that you can't log the time spent flying with a check pilot who is not an instructor. As you probably know, you need to get your differences training signed off by an instructor, so would do at least one loggable p/ut trip before being certified to solo a tailwheel/tailskid aircraft. By the way, flying a low-powered Cub is a real pleasure in itself. Have fun.

[oscarmike]

Hmmm........... very interested by what I've read on this thread so far - may I pass on my own experience?

Like the original poster I had only previously flown tricycle undercarriage, Robins and PA28's etc. all club aircraft.

Then I heard of a share for sale in a Jodel which I subsequently bought. I therefore needed differences training.

I asked at the club where I did my PPL course, and after much scratching of heads and consulting various publications they concluded that whilst legally, as I was licensed to fly single engine land planes I could technically just jump in and go, although clearly this would have been insane.

However they did conclude that differences training did NOT have to be undertaken by an instructor, although before flying solo I would have to undertake a check ride and have my log book signed by an instructor.

They simply suggested that I flew with other members of the syndicate until I felt comfortable with take off and landings on both grass and hard runways, then take the check ride.

This is exactly what I did, but I did log the time as P1/S, as technically the aircraft was under my control. Was this incorrect?

Then, after around five hours, I took the check ride and got signed off. The instructor made no comments about me logging the differences training as P1/S so I assumed it must be OK. (The instructor filled in my log book for the check ride himself and logged me as simply P1.)

From the short time I have been flying the Jodel, and talking to other tail wheel pilots I gather that the Jodel is one of the easier types to master, and there is no way I would assume I could fly other tail wheel aircraft competently without a lot more experience.

Our insurers have also imposed a higher excess for me on the policy until I have completed 10 hours on type.

Regards

[FNG]

My understanding is that you cannot log p1/s except after a successful test with an examiner (or when acting as a supervised co-pilot, but this only applies to aircraft which have a minimum crew of 2 pilots, unlike most GA types which require only 1 pilot).
See Irv Lee's FAQ, especially items 24 and 8.

http://www.higherplane.flyer.co.uk/faq.htm

See also the LASORS at

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/175/Lasors_Section_A.pdf

[oscarmike]

Quite so, but surely in this case it is not a 'test' as such?

Simply a check ride with an instructor?

:confused:

[FNG]

Correct, it's not a test, so the P1/S notation is not applicable. To summarise: time spent with a non-instructor check pilot is not loggable. Time spent with an instructor is training time and loggable as P/UT. That, and the instructor's signature, provide your record of differences training.

[MLS-12D]

I agree: legally you should not have logged any of the time flown with other members of the syndicate.

Beware the logbook police! :E

[Zlin526]

ISTR the CAA have, in the past, granted certain establishments an Exemption for suitably experienced 'check pilots' to undertake conversion flying, where the stude can log the time as P/UT. Not sure of the current status of this, so best call the chaps at the Belgrano, join the queueing system and wait for somebody to answer the call. I believe the Tiger Club have one of these Exemptions in place.

Z

[Flyin'Dutch']

I believe that the PFA coaches have a similar exemption.

FD

[Justiciar]

To summarise: time spent with a non-instructor check pilot is not loggable

Sorry, don't gree. If you are simply having a check out, say on a club aircraft, then you can log it as P1. The check out is simply a private as opposed to legal requirement.

On the other hand, differences training is a legal requirement, must be with an instructor, and is logged as Pu/T. This is so even though the regulations to not specify any minimum standard for the differences training.

[FNG]

I don't really care what people write in their log books and tend to be surprised by how much time people spend discussing whether you can log "pilot bloke sitting in the back making unhelpful remarks" or similar.

Isn't the simple rule that (leaving aside exemptions) when two PPLs fly in an aircraft which has a minimum crew of one pilot, only one of them can be P1 at any given moment in time. They can decide between themselves who is P1. In the case of a checkout on a complex type, however, if one of the two PPLs has not yet received differences training for the complexity, then he/she can't at that stage be P1.

[oscarmike]

Now I'm really confused!

Does this mean therefore, that whilst I was flying with other syndicate members (i.e. not instructors) I was technically a passenger, even though I was 'sole manipulator of the controls'?

As the other member do not have instructor status, I agree I can not log the time as P.U.T. but does this also apply to being 'supervised' ?

As I mentioned before I asked this question of many people at the flying club, and it seemed nobody could give me a definitive answer.

:confused: :confused: :confused:

[Justiciar]

Does this mean therefore, that whilst I was flying with other syndicate members (i.e. not instructors) I was technically a passenger, even though I was 'sole manipulator of the controls'?

Yes, if you do not already have differences training you cannot legally be P1 in the aircraft. If you have a tail wheel sign off and simply want a check-out under the syndicate rules, then you can log it as P1. Technically you have to agree which of you is to be PIC, but I don't imagine there would be any argument in case of a check-out flight.

[wagon pull]

The most important thing to check is that the instructor has suffient experience and it is not going to be a case of the blind leading the blind. I would suggest an instructor who learnt on tailwheel or has been regularly flying tailwheel for a long time, otherwise you will find your self wrapped up in an ever decreasing circle of knowledge. Be aware your Cpl IR drivers might have all the badges but not necessarily the experience, but having said this there are a few good guys out there if you look carefully.

[Mark 1]

The PFA exemption for coaching was ratified by making them CRIs (Class rating instructor). This qualification allows the giving of flight instruction to an existing licence holder for the purpose of renewing, revalidating and additional training in the appropriate class - in this case SEP landplanes.

The experience requirements are greater than for a full FI, but the training is a lot less - about 1 week full time.

Its a bit of a grey area, but I believe it would be legal for a SNY to perform take-offs and landings if the P1 was in a position to re-take control at any time. Thus the 'student' could obtain the experience, but wouldn't be able to log it.

The instructor signing for differences training only has to sign to the effect that you have reached a satisfactory standard.
Booking P1s is incorrect for this. If flying with a PPL/CPL then its SNY, unless they have a FI/CRI where it is Put.

[oscarmike]

If flying with a PPL/CPL then its SNY, unless they have a FI/CRI where it is Put.

Please excuse my ignorance - what is SNY?

:confused:

[shortstripper]

Easy silly! ... it means ... 'Smee Not You that gets to book the hours! ;)

IM

[Circuit Basher]

OM - Supernumerary Crew [not sure whether this is still a valid operating category, but may well be for the 747 drivers!!]

[Zlin526]

Looked at a guys logbook once to see about 200 hrs P.2! The only aircraft he had flown were 4 seat tourers, presumably the time was logged as he sat in the back seat on a booze run to Les Tucket??

Z

[Mark 1]

SNY = Supernumerary

i.e. You are not a required member of the crew, and as such you cannot log the time in your log book as a crew member. It merely serves as a means of recording flying experience in your book without it contributing to your totals.
As nearly all SEP aircraft specify the minimum crew as one pilot, your choices for the log book are:

P1, Put or P1s(PICUS).
The latter is only used for a successful flight test with an FE/CRE

or SNY where you don't record the flight time in any of the total columns.

[KCDW]

Re: the Tiger Club. Does anyone know if there is a minimum overall hour requirement to fly one other than the 20 hrs tailwheel experience they ask for?

[Warped Factor]

KCDW,

Re: the Tiger Club. Does anyone know if there is a minimum overall hour requirement to fly one other than the 20 hrs tailwheel experience they ask for?

Don't believe so.

Also the 20 hours is a recommendation as opposed to a rule.

2, 20 or 200+hrs tailwheel you'll be allowed to take one solo only when your check pilot is happy.

WF.

[Zlin526]

KCDW,

Excuse my ignorance here, but why ask the assorted members of Pprune when it's a bit easier to ring the Tiger Club and ask them directly? That way, you can guarantee to get the correct answer straight from the horses mouth (Sorry Jerry!). Although Warped factor has got it in one.

I'll even make it easier for you by providing the number

+44 1622 891017:ok:

[KCDW]

Ta Warped Factor and Zlin526 - just in investigation mode at the moment. Slowly evolving a plan to own/form/join a group for a simple tailwheel such as a Luscombe or C140.... branching out to do a bit of Moth flying would be a very pleasant distraction. Oh and Headcorn is my local...

[Tango Oscar]

I paid the Tiger Club a visit on saturday, and was very impressed. They have some fantastic aircraft, and were very welcoming.

ZLIN256 - You are correct, they have an agreement with the CAA that means any time spent training with their check pilots IS logable. First flight is next weekend in their Super Cub.

Thanks all for your comments - very imformative as always.:ok: