The unspoken merits of a taildragger

[Pilot DAR]

A few posters have commented on taildraggers recently, particularly in the context of training. Though I am the proud owner of a C150 (with the middle wheel where clyde intended it), I cannot speak highly enough of training in / experiencing taildragger flying. Though my opporunities to fly taildraggers are infrequent, they are immensly valuable and satisfying. It is my opinion that a pilot who has not become at least somewhat proficient on taildraggers, is like a driver who does not drive a standard transmission. It does not mean that they are not a good pilot / driver, but something is still missing.

I recently did some advanced "mentoring" flying in a C206, with its experienced pilot. After I spent a half an hour showing him that rudder pedals worked in the air, as well as on the ground, his flying improved. It seems to me that taildragger pilots never forget the pedals, once they have learned to use them.

Having recently been entrusted with a taildragger amphibian, I am reaquaining myself with this delightful pleasure, and really appreciating not having a nosewheel there, particularly during beaching! And the 12kt crosswind on the 50 foot wide runway was not as scary as I thought it would be! The guys who designed those planes did know something after all!

If you're considering getting the most out of any light aircraft you fly, with improved safety skills as an added benefit, seek out taildragger training. You'll have the satisfaction that you had way back when as you mastered a bicycle, and left the tricycle behind (pun intended).

Pilot DAR

[englishal]

The only difference between a taildragger and a tricycle nose wheel aeroplane is on the ground. Once in the air there is no difference. So why does being a taildragger pilot make you any better? Planes are ment to be flown not driven on the ground....;) Equally learning to fly a taildragger is only of benefit to anyone who actually flies one is it not?

You could say that doing aerobatics improves a pilots handling skills more than anything else....

[Piper.Classique]

The only difference between a taildragger and a tricycle nose wheel aeroplane is on the ground. Once in the air there is no difference.

Well, not quite. There is no noticeable handling difference. The performance is however better, with in particular a faster cruise due to the reduced drag (on fixed gear a/c)
Ok, I'm a pedant ;)

[Tony Hirst]

The only difference between a taildragger and a tricycle nose wheel aeroplane is on the ground. Once in the air there is no difference. So why does being a taildragger pilot make you any better?
Quite right. The difference in take-off, landing and ground handling can be significant and does generally require must more awareness about the environs, the aircraft and the surface than a tricycle gear aeroplane. I would generally regard that as a disadvantage of the configuration!

If you want to compare like for like, take a C152 Texas Taildragger. takeoff, landing and ground handling compared to a tri C152 is completely different, sloppy atitude and/or speed setting will probably result in bouces and chewing up runway. In the air all you will notice is the 105kts airspeed!

Ground side aside, I think that many t/ds are vintage aircraft which and their handling and performance in the air can be different than for a modern equivelent (t/d or tri). That is possibly one source of the misconception attached to tailwheel flying per se.

[Mike Cross]

1. You will never break the noseleg on a tailwheel a/c.
2. Sloppy approaches in a nosewheel a/c don't necessarily result in embarrasment. In a tailwheel they generally do. This teaches pilots better handling, which means they are less likely to bust the noseleg (see (1) above) due to a PIO, they don't wear out the brakes, and they are less likely to end up in the hedge at the far end.

[ShyTorque]

they don't wear out the brakes, and they are less likely to end up in the hedge at the far end.

I've seen a few in the hedge at the near end, which is a lot more dangerous!

[Flying Binghi]

The unspoken merits of a taildragger


IMHO, they just look right :)

Show me an aircraft that looks better then a Super Cub, a DC3, a Mustang, and the best of all - The Spitfire :cool:



.......... try and visualise a Spitfire with a (shudder) nose wheel :eek:

[rusty sparrow]

As I've just recently got my tailwheel rating, I found that the conversion really made me focus on feeling how the aircraft (a Jodel) behaved - more guiding than driving. In a typical tricycle u/c acft, I can basically point it down the runway, shove in the power and take off. With a tailwheel, getting the tailwheel up, holding it in that position, and in a straight line until takeoff, made me far more gentle and 'sense aware' on elevator control and more proactive in using rudder. Even turning a tailwheel acft on a soggy grass strip was a new technique to learn. Especially in a crosswind. I found landing a hassle - back to the bounces of student days. Until I relaxed and learnt how to guide the acft to landing with good speed, attitude and power control. So - I'm sure I'm a better and more aware pilot as a result.

[Pilot DAR]

It has been correctly pointed out that both types fly the same, once airborne (speed aside). I agree. Using the analogy of the automatic vs standard car, however, those both drive the same once you're on the motorway, but getting on and off will build your skills faster in the standard. Once you are proficient with shifting gears, you are more aware of that aspect, and more likely to use that "control" through out your trip (correctly downshifting). I think that the same applies to the use of the rudder in flight. The taildragger helps with rudder awareness. This can be a very important safety aspect during very low speed flight, as I recently reminded the C206 pilot during my aforementioned mentoring. He had the ball all over the place during our approach to stall flying. I pointed out that if he let it stall that way, it might be an exciting ride. He just was not aware.

My inattention to the correct application of rudder has also embarassed me in a delightful tricycle type - the Islander. I suddenly learned that if you are not careful to center the pedals for a moment, when you let the nosewheel down during a crosswind landing, there can be quite a chirp and yaw!

Taildragger keeps me thinking about pedals!

Pilot DAR

[englishal]

Ah but have you noticed how the trend in new cars is to move away from the clunky old, manual gear box? My new one doesn't have a clutch but has flappy paddles on the steering wheel. Still drives as well as a manual ;)

When I flew the Cub, it was a joy to fly, and easy to set up for a stable approach. But I did get this feeling that when on the ground it was constantly trying to kill me.....

Each to their own ;)

[Contacttower]

This might help visualise what a Spitfire would look like with a nose gear:

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd195/edbellamy/P-39N.jpg

The Spitfire on the other hand naturally looks to the sky when parked...one's eye moves from the tail up towards the tips of blades, she stands proud and alert looking with the stance emphasising her graceful lines.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Just two short comments on this subject.

The inability of any pilot to understand the use of rudder in flight is due to substandard flight instruction from day one.

A tail wheel pilot will be able to fly a nose wheel airplane with no effort whatsoever, a nose wheel pilot will have difficulty going from a nose wheel airplane to a tail wheel airplane without proper training.

[jxk]

Real men don't eat quiche and do fly tailwheel aircraft :O

Seriously though, if you haven't tried a Cub, C180/5 or similar you should. It's just another little skill to learn and makes you appreciate some of the finer points of t/o and landing.

[Crash one]

I too have just completed tailwheel differences & I am convinced my general handling airborne has also improved. Cessna 152s don't care if you don't use the rudder in turns for instance. My '59 Emeraude certainly does.
Shirley if you are "required" to fly more acurately during takeoff & landing then that acuracy will remain during the bit in between?

[Lister Noble]

Who is Shirley?
:);)

[White Shadow]

When I was learning to be an R A F pilot (quite a few years ago) we all, future SE and ME, did our EFTS training on Tiger Moths. That training served us well.
WS

[Crash one]

Who is Shirley?
:);)

Not Cher

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Chuck is correct. tailwheel pilots know what the rudder is for, and fly in a co-ordinated way that is usually demanded by tailwheel aircraft.

The types do not fly the same - not because of the U/C config, but becuase tailwheel aircraft often handle better, are less sloppy, and require accurate hand / foot co-ordination. You can probably fly a PA28 and never use the rudder! In my book, that's not an aeroplane, it's a sloppy airbourn car!

Many of today's nosewheel-trained pilots simply can't land. Watch the 'arrivals' at ant GA field - a high percentage of the spamcans will be 3-pointed, way too fast, with little or no attempt at a hold-off. All those broken nosewheels in EVERY month's AAIB reports put ALL our insurance premiums up!

When I flew the Cub, it was a joy to fly, and easy to set up for a stable approach. But I did get this feeling that when on the ground it was constantly trying to kill me.....

You should know that Cubs can only just kill you! Seriously, the Cub is a pussycat, but you do need to know how to land. What your staement says to me is that you need a bit more time in the aeroplane to become 'at home' with it. Then you will start to really enjoy it (it can put a grin on your face that no spamcan ever will)!

SSD

[AfricanEagle]

Taildraggers make better pilots.

Then there are taildraggers and taildraggers.

After a period of absence, I went for some flying with Cub owner/friend/instructor Cristiano.

After the second landing he quietly commented: "You've been flying the Maule. You are using your feet properly".

[Piper.Classique]

Chuck said


A tail wheel pilot will be able to fly a nose wheel airplane with no effort whatsoever, a nose wheel pilot will have difficulty going from a nose wheel airplane to a tail wheel airplane without proper training.

Not invariably. If the initial instruction was good, then it doesn't take long. I learned on a C150 and converted quickly to a cub. Big caveat here, the initial instruction.......Now that everyone is terrified of sideslips, spins, anything out of the ordinary, it gets harder to find a properly trained pilot, let alone a good instructor.

Let's not get fixated on the type, more on the quality of the training.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Chuck said
Quote:

A tail wheel pilot will be able to fly a nose wheel airplane with no effort whatsoever, a nose wheel pilot will have difficulty going from a nose wheel airplane to a tail wheel airplane without proper training.

O.K. I should have said " will GENERALLY have difficulty "

Naturally there will be a broad spread between individuals when it comes to the ability to keep a tail wheel airplane going where you want it to on the ground during the learning process.

Anyone have any idea how many flight instructors are still qualified to teach on a tail wheel airplane, 10% - 50% - 75% 100%??

[Say again s l o w l y]

Not many Chuck. I can only think of 15 FI's I know with what I would call a decent amount of tailwheel experience.

If you get a chance to fly a "proper" aircraft. Do it. It's nothing to be scared of if you are shown how to do it properly.

[malc4d]

Hey Chuck,
So now that you made me fly a widgeon.....:p ( did you know that under the FAA its not a tailwheel aircraft !!! )
What shall i try now....?......;)

[Chuck Ellsworth]

A Widgeon is not a tail wheel aircraft??

Maybe they were thinking that is not a tail wheel aircraft when it is on the water?? :E

Did you fly the Widgeon?

How did you like it?

[englishal]

What your staement says to me is that you need a bit more time in the aeroplane to become 'at home' with it.
A completely fair assesment :ok:

I only did a bit, but really enjoyed the experience, and will no dubt continue with the TW training in the future. All due credit to my instructor who was a brave man. On the second landing I did manage to plonk it down without too much drama.....Then promptly relaxed the back pressure and eased off the rudder inputs and nearly got bitten :O

[Final 3 Greens]

Let's get a few things straight here.

It is long past due to recogise trikes as being "conventional gear" aircraft, since taildraggers may have held that title up to the 1940s, but there are goodness knows how many trikes compared to tail wheel aircraft these days.

Tail wheel aircraft do require extra training and extra airmanship compared to trikes, even taxiinig in a quartering wind requires due care and attention.

Old fashioned equipment is generally harder to use than more modern equipment, e.g. sextants versus or GPS, radio range versus VOR. Some people get a sense of satisfaction from mastering equipment with a vintage configuration - live and let live I say.

Tail wheel aircraft do require more skill with the rudder, then again so do gliders and helicopter pilots would argue that they are the best on hand/foot eye coordination.

Tail wheel aircraft have advantages on rougher strips.

However, do not confuse

1 - poor flight instruction that produces poor handling skills with trikes - its the FI, not the aircraft that produces this

2 - tail dragger pilots always being better pilots than trike pilots - it ain't necessarily so and handling skills are only one part of piloting skills

[malc4d]

Chuck
Luved it........took awhile to get used to the mixture / fuel controls being over my right shoulder.......:)
I had hoped to get the tailwheel signoff as well as multi seaplane, but seems its not a tailwheel aircraft but an anphibian.............:rolleyes:

Malc

(was trying to add a pic , but cant seem to do it ........ :ugh: )

[Pilot DAR]

It is the evolution of the training segment of general aviation that instructors do not generally have taildragger experience. Like so many segments of our society, we don't seem willing to pay our teachers well enough to consistently attract really experienced ones.

So, while we whine about the cost of flying instruction, we suffer at the tutelage of a pilot who him or her self is still learning. Certainly there is nothing wrong with that, but it can make it difficult when the occupants on a training flight are both new to aviation, just at different levels of experience. Number of hours as a pilot is one thing, number of years, and types flown is another.

An instructor, who has never had the opportunity to learn on a taildragger, is not at fault for not knowing how to fly one. I believe it to be true, however, that I could use a nosewheel aircraft to teach the first half of what a new pilot would need to know to correctly handle a taildragger. So if the training of pilots and instructors were more thorough, taildraggers would not be so far out of the norm. Will we pay the cost for better instructors? Other posts here suggest not.

My most effective and memorable training has been presented to me by non-instructors, mostly private pilots, flying the aircraft they know well. We, who have the experience, including taildraggers, owe it to the students of the future, to share our knowledge with instructors. Instructors owe it to their students to broaden their skills – perhaps then the merits of each type of aircraft will be more easily understood and appreciated by newer pilots.

As I landed the taildragger amphibian back on my runway yesterday, after a day on the water, the crosswind demanded a whole lot of my skill. How lucky I was to have a steerable tail wheel. The Tiger Moth I learned taildragger on, only had a stick under the tail to keep the fabric off the ground. It did not assist in rolling or steering at all. How far we’ve come, I really appreciated that steerable tailwheel, and the training from a private pilot, all those years ago!

[Piper.Classique]

Thank you Pilot DAR, for saying clearly and concisely what I would have rambled on about for two pages.
I would add only one thing to your words, that part time unpaid instructors have a lot to offer. We don't steal jobs from people who want to fly full time, but fill in the gaps, often important ones, in the schedule, and, dare I say it, in knowledge and experience. Here in France the flying club culture is still strong, our club has three unpaid SEP instructors, four unpaid tug pilots, and one unpaid microlight instructor, as well as all those who do the admin and look after the buildings. The instructors are re-imbursed for travel costs, that is all. The only thing done outside the volunteer sphere is the aircraft maintenance. Maybe that is one of the reasons we can rent out our Rans Coyote at 66 euros an hour, and 127 euros for the 180 horse DR 400. Just so EASA doesn't kill that for us :}

[Pilot DAR]

I quite agree Piper.Classique,

I flew unpaid as a part time C185 jump pilot for a few summers. I did not need the time, they just needed a taildragger pilot. I tried to support the effort by mentoring other pilots, but the one thing I could not manage to mentor out, was the behaviour of flying more than one whole person overgross. I figured out that if I was not aboard, I would not be flying the plane one person overgross. So I stopped. That was fine for me, but they kept doing it anyway!

Mentoring is informal instructing, which is a valuable supplement to the important skills offered by full time instructors. We, who have something to offer back, owe it to those who are less experienced, to offer some of our wisdom, and help them out, be it here, or actually around an aircraft.

Two weeks ago, I offered what became 14 hours of my time, checking out a new owner in a Bellanca Viking. There were no instructors who could be found, who were even insurable on the aircraft, much less expeirenced enought on type to do a checkout. I know that I taught enough that I really did prevent an accident. The owner is happy and confident now. One day, he will offer to help another pilot grow their skills...

The next generation of pilots will behave in the example set by this generation....

[effortless]

Wheel-barrowing a nose-wheeler often ends in damage. Wheel-barrowing a tail-wheeler is a way of moving it around the apron. :p

[Pilot DAR]

multicpl,

I have been flying a Thurston Teal amphib, which I have for the summer. Information can be found here: Thurston Teal Amphibian (http://www.seabee.info/teal.htm)

It has a lot of similarity with a Lake LA-4, as they were both designed by Dave Thurston. I have come to really appreciate the taildragger configuration. It is fantastic for beaching, as you extend the main wheels, and run it up. Its not trying to drive a delicate retractable nose wheel into the bottom, and making you worry that you broke it. The extended mains protect the hull from submerged objects to a large degree. The mains can be extended and retracted by hand, and are great “brakes” in the water while taxiing.

As with any plane, you give a bit, you get a bit. People seem to think that taildraggers are all give, because they are more challenging on the runway. So it may be, but there are merits in the background, which can really be appreciated, once you notice them.

Pilot DAR