Tailwheel tips anyone?

[Aerobatic Flyer]

Does anyone have any words of wisdom on how to land a PA-18 (90hp, flapless) consistently without scaring oneself? :confused:

I have flown a number of tailwheel types, and am in current solo practice on various Jodels (D113 and D140). Generally I don't have any problems. Once they're down they stay down and swings are easy enough to correct with rudder.

The Cub, however, seemed unduly prone to bouncing (even when I thought I'd held off properly), and - worse - I found it very hard to correct a swing after landing. The rudder alone didn't seem to do much, and I found the heel brakes were very hard to operate and not very effective.

Any ideas?

Other than the landing problems, the Cub was fantastic. Flying at 70mph with the door open on a warm evening was one of the nicest aviation experiences I've had in a long time.:)

[FlyingForFun]

AF,

I have about 80 hours on the PA18, and of all the tail-draggers I've flown (PA18, Great Lakes, Pitts S2C and Europa mono-wheel) I found it by far the easiest. But I also have far more time on it than any of the others, so that may not be a fair comparison.

The most important thing for 3-pointers is that the stick must be all the way back - none of this set-the-attitude-and-hold-it stuff, you're going for a full-stall landing, or as close as possible. As with any 3-pointer, setting the correct speed over the threshold will make this easier, as you'll spend less time in the flare.

If you're bouncing wheel-landings, the only solution is practice - you have to recognise when the wheels are going to touch, and be ready to let the stick go slightly forward. The only way to do this is practice, practice, practice.

The swing is more of a problem. You really shouldn't need to use the brakes for directional control on the runway. There is nothing specific about the PA18 in this respect, as far as I know. One technique, for all tail-draggers, is the old cliche of dancing on the rudder pedals. I never really understood this until one instructor explained it as follows: use the rudders all the way to touch-down, even if you don't think you need to use them, keep using them anyway. Then, when you touch the ground, your brain already knows exactly how much response it can get out of the rudders, so there won't be the usual over-correcting which quite often happens.

If you're not doing wheel-landings, I suggest you get an good tail-dragger instructor and learn them. One common teaching technique for wheel-landings is fast-taxying, which will also teach you to control the swing. Apart from controlling the swing, and giving you more tools to use, learning wheel-landings will also help your general technique, for example you'll be better at controlling the aircraft during take-off especially once the tail-wheel is off the ground.

The only other thing I can suggest is to try a different PA18. I've flown 3 PA18s, and each one handles subtley differently, especially at low speeds and on the ground. If you try another one and find it easier, then there may be a problem with your particular aircraft. This wouldn't surprise me, especially what you said about not having the rudder authority to control the swing.

I agree, by the way - the PA18 is the favourite of all the aircraft I've flown so far! :D

FFF
---------------

[Aerobatic Flyer]

Hi FFF,

Thanks for the reply!

I was bouncing 3-pointers.... I thought the stick was all the way back, but it probably wasn't.

Funny what you say about the PA-18 being the easiest tail-dragger, because for me it was just the opposite. The Jodels, Citabria, Zlins, and Cap 10 were all OK, and even the Pitts S2A was OK apart from the visibility. (In the Pitts I find just holding a 3-point attitude then bringing the stick hard back on touchdown works). It's been a long time since I bounced as much as I did last Saturday in the Cub!

For holding straight after landing, again I've never had too much trouble in the other types. As you say, you need to be active on the rudder but on one of my worse attempts in the Cub (in a very gentle crosswind) we did an initial bounce and on the 2nd touchdown veered dramatically towards the edge of the runway. Rudder alone wasn't enough to correct it. (Nor was I, alone, enough to correct it! Luckily the instructor had quicker reactions.)

As for wheel-landings, I've only really tried them in the Jodel D140. It's big, easy to fly and quite easy to do wheel-landings in. It doesn't seem such a natural thing to do in the smaller types. I must do some practice.

Unfortunately I've only got access to the one Cub (and here it is (http://bravomike.free.fr/piperc4.jpg), and here (http://bravomike.free.fr/piperc1.jpg) ). It did occur to me that the bungees may not be quite as they should, but it's more likely that it was me!:rolleyes:

[FlyingForFun]

That can't be a Super Cub. It's the wrong colour - Super Cubs are yellow! :D

Oh yes, and if it was you flying in the first picture, the tail-wind certainly won't help your landings! :eek:

There is no reason not to wheel-land a PA18, especially with an instructor behind you. In fact, it's the only safe way of getting it down in a descent, gusty crosswing, in my experience.

I wonder about your example of bouncing then veering across the runway... depending on how you bounced, is it possible that the bounce induced some roll or yaw, which caused you to not be straight on your second landing? I'd guess that, in recovering from the bounce, you may not have noticed the drift or yaw. I don't know, I'm just guessing here.

I've never flown any of the other types you've listed. The closest is my S2C vs your S2A, but since I only have an hour on type, I don't know it well enough to compare to the PA18. But I have been pax in a Cap10 a couple of times (thanks FNG!), and, if I remember correctly, the Cap10 doesn't land with the stick full-back. I'd try to concentrate on that the next time you fly.

The bungees are easy enough to check - I think it's about 3 screws which hold the covers on. But I don't think you'd get much of a mechanical bounce unless you were dropping in from quite high. I'd have thought that the aerodynamic bounce from landing main-wheels first is far more likely. When I mentioned mechanical problems, I was thinking more along the lines of the tail-wheel linkage not giving you enough tail-wheel authority. But, now I think about it, immediately after landing you'll have enough aerodynamic rudder control that tail-wheel authority isn't all that important, so scrap that one!

FFF
--------------

[Lowtimer]

I fly the 90-hp no-flaps Super Cub sometimes and have always found it one of the more docile taildraggers. If you are happy in the Pitts, I find it hard to believe that a properly rigged Cub would give you directional trouble and perhaps something is out of whack with it. The brakes are relatively ineffective but you shouldn't need them much for directional control on the roll-out.

I suggest that you ask for the undercarriage geometry to be checked out, as if this happened to me in a Cub I would suspect that the wheel alignment was wrong - perhaps too much toe-in (or insufficient toe out).The bounciness is hard to comment on without knowing something about the state of your strip. On grass I also find the Cub rather bouncy compared to the Pitts - perhaps because it is so light.

[QDMQDMQDM]

I fly a 150HP Super Cub, but often land it flapless. As the veteran of many bad landings and a couple of decent ones, here are my suggestions:

a) Check your approach speed. Too high an approach and over the hedge speed has been the most consistent reason for bad landings for me. It's a big fat wing that loves to float and float if you're a bit too fast and then you end up bouncing the landing.

b) Definitely stick full back for a 3-pointer. No, FULL back! No, more than that!

c) Try glancing out the side in the flare to get the perspective right.

d) You'll get used to the heel brakes and when you do you'll find them easy to use, quite intuitive and effective at preventing swings at the end of a crosswind roll-out.

e) To get feedback on this issue from 10,000 hour Super Cub pilots, post your queries in the Cafe Supercub folder at www.supercub.org

Puttering along with the door open at 500 feet or so is sublime. Welcome to cubbing.

QDM

[Aerobatic Flyer]

FFF

It wasn't me (thankfully there was nobody with a camera!), but the strip is one-way so downwind landings are something that has to be lived with. Don't plan on trying it in the Cub for a while, though...

I suspect you're probably right about getting a bit of yaw or roll in the bounce, and that causing the dramatic lurch for the edge of the runway. On the landings that didn't bounce things were easier.

Lowtimer

I too thought that a Cub would be easy after a Pitts! Having said that, I've only landed a Pitts on grass and only landed the Cub on tarmac which possibly didn't help.

As you say, the brakes aren't up to much. The main problem was reaching them, however. The only way I could get a decent pressure on the pedal was to take my foot off the rudder...

QDM

60mph over the threshold. Stick full back? The trim spring was strong, so I think I goofed on the stick back bit...

As for the heel brakes, I hope you're right! It felt like either my legs were too long or my ankles too inflexible...

I'll have another go in a couple of weeks, and hopefully things will go better then.

[QDMQDMQDM]

60mph over the threshold. Stick full back? The trim spring was strong, so I think I goofed on the stick back bit...

Almost certainly too fast, I'd say, but it's obviously dependent on weight and the accuracy of your ASI. More like 50mph over the hedge. The experts will do it slower.

Trim it for the approach and you should easily be able to overcome trim forces to flare. Eat your spinach!

Like I say, the fellows at Supercub.org are the ones to talk to.

QDM

[Aerobatic Flyer]

Trim it for the approach and you should easily be able to overcome trim forces to flare.

Once I get the hand of finding the trimmer by feel alone...!! There was at least 1 approach where I gave up and just because I needed my hand on the throttle instead of fumbling around for the trimmer.:rolleyes:

60mph didn't feel too fast - we didn't float for too long. The instructor and I are both starting our diets tomorrow.;) And the runway has a bit of a slope so you need enough speed to round out to a climbing attitude. Still, the instructor was fairly new to Cubbing so he might have had me approaching a bit faster than needed.

Thanks for the supercub.org link!

[Crossedcontrols]

Just seen your post.
I have a PA18 -95, 60 MPH seems a bit fast it will float forever. Try 55 .The book says 42 for the stall speed, so 56 is plus a third. If you are at max weight or more I find that it can drop out the sky with a bump if you are too slow. I still have problems getting to the brakes, but easy enough on full rudder, when things are getting a bit squirrelly. Any large deviations to the left or right have been me being too slow to react or heavy on the rudder.
As the others say dancing on the rudder pedals helps, but you'll know that better than me with the other taildraggers.
The 95 is a nice aircraft, and pretty cheap to run, a really good way to hour build 'cos you 'aint goin anywhere quickly.

Enjoy

CC

Remember:-

[QDMQDMQDM]

Ah, just looked at the pictures. J'ai encore un tip, Monsieur: try grass. It's a lot, lot easier.

QDM

Talking of speeds, these fellows say 45mph is the speed for water-skiing, down even to 25mph:

http://www.supercub.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=1935#1935

Do not try this at home.

:)

QDM

[Chuck Ellsworth]

A.F :

You say you are flying with an instructor?

Why can't the instructor sort out your problem?:confused:

Cat Driver:

[LowNSlow]

I used to have an L4, different I know but similar enough. As QDMx3 says the stick must be all the way back and then some. Speed is critical. If I landed the Cub at 55mph I'd do Tigger impersonations all the way down the runway. My touchdown speed was usually 45mph after an approach at 55mph and 50 over the hedge. It can be much slower with power and practice.

You can wind on full aft trim coming down the final approach but it takes a reasonable amount of forward push to keep the nose down until the flare but the aft trim helps to get the stick back when you're on the ground :D
Only trim aft once you are certain of a: reaching the field and b: are not going around though cos the pitch up with full power would be very "interesting". :eek:

I agree with the chaps above that if your speeds are OK you may have a problem with either the undercarriage rigging (try jacking it up and see if you can turn the leg to fuselage attachment bolts, if you can't they're bent) or maybe the rudder stops and/or tailwheel steering springs need adjusting to give more travel.

Those chaps doing the water skiing are bonkers :eek: :eek:

[Aerobatic Flyer]

Chuck -
Why can't the instructor sort out your problem?

He probably can. However he's French and I'm not, and some of the finer points can sometimes get lost in the translation!

[nonradio]

Rather than thinking 'landing attitude' and then waiting, which does work very well for Pitts and other buggarall-lift-winged types, try rounding out and then think 'prevent the landing' ie a classic hold off. You can't hurry or force the touchdown.....
If you aren't already, I would also try making glide approaches rather than long draggy powered ones. Whatever you do, resist the temptation to look at the ground under that invitingly open door ti try and judge height! Look ahead, middle dist. as before.
Also flaps are for girls:D
What bit of France are you flying in?

[Aerobatic Flyer]

nonradio

I'm in the Alps. Glide approaches are a bit of a no-no, unfortunately, as go-arounds aren't possible at most sites and the glide approach limits your choices if you're a bit high. (Although the Cub seemed to slip very effectively).

[Lowtimer]

QDMx3,

I would be interested in some additional guidance on your "stick all the way back" point. On the PA-18-95 I fly, and trimming to 55 mph on final, even with no-one in the rear seat, I find that full back stick in the flare leads to a tailwheel-first arrival, before the mains, which seems a bit hard on the tailwheel.

I go for the exact three-point attitude, and bring the stick hard back only when I have touched down. Am I doing something different from you, or is it perhaps the case that your heavier engine means that the stick has to be all the way back for the three point attitude?

Regards,

[nonradio]

AF: I had a feeling you were going to say the runway wasn't exactly level! All the more reason to look well ahead.
Forget the bungees - 'bouncing' is an aerodynamic effect and is entirely due to excessive sink rates on touchdown (insufficient holdoff) and mainwheels touching first, allowing inertia to move the tail down and hence increase the AoA and produce another takeoff. The effect would be the same if the u/c was solid or excessively squidgy. But then I'm sure you already knew that.....

[FlyingForFun]

Lowtimer,

All 3 of the PA18-150s which I've flown have definitely had to be 3-pointed with the stick as far back as it goes. If that's not case on your PA18-95, I can think of three possible reasons:


As you say, the heavier engine may make a difference. Could someone else who flies a lower-powered Cub or Super Cub confirm how they 3-point their aircraft?
The trim wheel works by moving the entire front part of the stabiliser. Therefore, if you're out of trim, it might be possible to generate the required amount of downforce from the stabiliser without having the stick as far back as would normally be required? It's too early in the morning for my brain to work out which way out of trim you'd need to be! I think this is unlikely, though - I'm sure I've landed PA18s out of trim once or twice ;) and not noticed any significant difference in the stick position
Your aircraft is rigged in a strange way!


If it's the first, that means that the advice which myself and others have given to Aerobatic Flyer may not be correct, since he's not flying a 150hp aircraft :eek:

FFF
--------------

[LowNSlow]

I did have the occasional tailwheel first landing in the L4 with the 65hp engine but I put that down to bad driving and being too slow at the time causing the tail feathers to run out of lift before the mainplane. Normally I had full aft stick on for a 3 pointer at 45 mph. This is with my chunky (200lbs) self in the BACK seat cos it was a Cub rather than a Super Cub.

[QDMQDMQDM]

I go for the exact three-point attitude, and bring the stick hard back only when I have touched down.

Lowtimer,

This obviously works very well for you, but the danger in general of bringing the stick hard back AFTER three-pointing is of increasing the angle of attack of the wing, thus increasing lift and causing one of those fifteen foot taildragger bounces.

You may be right -- it may well be the heavier engine which makes the difference. It is a much heavier aircraft and I think it does benefit greatly from the flaps for that reason.

QDM

[FlyingForFun]

QDM,

The danger in general of bringing the stick hard back AFTER three-pointing is of increasing the angle of attack...
I'm not sure I agree. If you've got all three wheels on the ground, it's not going to possible to increase the angle of attack. The back of the aircraft can't go any lower (unless there's some "springiness" in the ground or the tailwheel, both of which should be negligable), and the nose won't go any higher because there's not enough lift - if there was you wouldn't have touched down in this attitude. Bringing the stick hard back after landing is the way I land my Europa every time - not doing so risks the tail being thrown back into the air by a bump on the runway.

The issue is whether bringing the stick all the way back before landing is necessary. In some types, doing so will result in a tail-first landing - not a real problem, but not pretty and not kind to the tail-wheel. In other types, not doing so will result in a main-wheel-first landing, which will be followed by an aerodynamic bounce as the center of gravity does what centres of gravity do and the angle of attack increases. In my experience, and that of most posters, Super Cubs will bounce unless the stick is hard back before landing - LowTimer is the only poster who hasn't found this to be the case.

FFF
----------

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Guys

The tecnique for 3-pointing any tailwheeler is the same - hold of until all 3 wheels *just *above the ground and keep pulling back sufficiently that it doesn't land, but not enough to cause a climb. Eventually either you will run out of back stick and the aeroplane will settle genty on, 3 point. Or the wing will lose so much lift (not quite stalled, but very close) that despite further backward stick movement it sinks on in a 3-point.

If, at that point of touchdown, the stick is not already all the way back, pull it right back imeediatley and hold it there. The angle of attack cannot be further increased, becuase that would require the tail to rotate down - and being firmly on the ground, it can't. Kepp staright with rudder.

For a wheeler, check the descent in the level (tail-high) attitude, and allow the aeroplane to sink (a tiny bit of back stick just prior to the mains contacting may be required to cushion touchdown). As soon as the mains touch, ease the stick forward just enough to reduce the A of A and 'pin' the mains down. AS the aeroplane slows, keep straight with rudder (easier than in a 3-pointer, 'cause the speed is higher and the rudder is up in the slipstream). Gradually ease the stick further and further forward as you slow, to maintain the tail-high attitude. Eventually you will run out of forward stick and the tail will gently descend to the ground. In a Chippy with about 30 knots blowing down the strip you can come to a stand with the tail still up!

SSD

[FlyingForFun]

Agreed, SSD.

Is it not easy, though, when flying a type which will run out of lift before the stick is fully aft, to get into the habit of not having the stick fully aft until after landing? And is there not a temptation to then try to transfer this habit onto a different type, where it may not apply? This is what I think Aerobatic Flyer may be doing, and is why myself and others are encouraging him to ensure the stick really is fully back on a type which won't land any earlier than this.

FFF
---------------

[QDMQDMQDM]

I'm not sure I agree. If you've got all three wheels on the ground, it's not going to possible to increase the angle of attack.

Yes, quite so. A slip of the keyboard. ;) The danger of the technique is that if you do happen to land two wheels first and are in the habit of pulling the stick back AFTER you land you will be in for an unpleasant surprise.

Standard procedure in a wheel landing, of course, is to put the stick forward after touching to glue the mains on by decreasing angle of attack and so dumping lift.

QDM

[Them thar hills]

AF
Maybe I've missed something but a couple of things are relevant
If you hold off at the right height, as you FEEL the aircraft start to sink, then pull the stick slowly back and you should aim to touch down with it on the back stop (not optional in my book)
The magic word is FEEL, don't get bogged down with technicalities !
You may land tailwheel first but only if you held off too high would it become an untidy arrival.
Tailwheel steering springs shouldn't be overlooked. Some wouldn't be out of place on an old bed, ie too soft or wrongly set up, so because the ground steering is too soft, this causes extra footwork.
Proper Scott tailwheel springs (the most common type) are only £15-£20 and are cheap maintenance with a worthwhile result.
TTH
:)

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Them thar hills:

Could you elaborate on what you mean by "Feel" the aircraft begin to sink?

Did you mean to say " See " the aircraft begin to sink?

Thanks: :)

Cat Driver:

[Philip Whiteman]

The lower-powered Cubs have been mentioned by a couple of people. I've flown an L-4 (military J-3!) from a farm strip since 1989 -- and it still gives me the odd lesson in not paying full attention on landing. The PA-18 Super Cub is rather easier to land sans bounce, but either machine should be easy to steer during the rollout.

Two lessons from my past: worn-out Scott tailwheel steering arms plus 5 kt crosswind over tarmac runway equals groundloop; and properly rigged elevator equals tailwheel-first landings (when you have become used to not getting full up elevator!)

The tailwheel problem might not be apparent if you only fly from grass. Wear on the arms (hidden inside the circular steering body) allows the wheel to breakout at very low torque, or even castor freely.

Regarding the elevator rigging: I used to be able to sort of auto-land by feeding the stick back until it hit the rear stop, and we three-pointed. This almost eliminated any chance of a bounce. Tailwheel-first arrivals may be hard on the spring, but they are even less likely to result in a hop.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

I, too, used to fly an L4. It has 'bungee' un-damped mainwheel springing, so is more prone to rough-field-induced bounces than, say, a Chippy which has oleos. I can well remember executing perfect 3-pointers, greased on, (by no means always!) only to end up suffering a series of small bounces caused by Barton's rough surface. They were quite benign, and the cure was to keep the stick hard back as the aeroplane slowed, and eventually they'd stop.

The L4 also had a lovely built-in A of A indicator - as you flare, just you reach the 3-point attitude, the lower door will rise up in the slipstream to the hrizointal position (I *always* flew with the dors open!).

SSD

[nonradio]

It must be possible to 3 point, power off, without the stick fully aft since the stalling angle for a clean break, producing a nose down pitch, would require a much more tail low attitude, not to mention any ground effect; if this wasn't so, then landing would be a rather thrilling activity with wing drops, nose drops and other excessively exciting departures. Of course the machine is 'mushing' on, but in a controlled manner. Stick fully aft, given a slightly high roundout, will produce a tailwheel first arrival (how many Pitts' rudders have witness marks?). Certainly, the correct technique is to ease the stick back fully after touchdown to prevent skipping on bumpy surfaces, but not to yank back at the moment of touchdown since you may add to any bouncing tendency.
Back seat Cubs are easy to fly and land, but difficult to fly WELL - must be a good trainer, then!:D

[FlyingForFun]

nonradio,

The stall very close to the ground is completely different to the stall that you practice at altitude, due to ground effect. This is why you can 3-point some aircraft with the stick fully aft.

I wish I knew more about this subject, but I don't. Maybe someone else can fill in some details. Genghis? Anyone else?

FFF
----------------

[nonradio]

FFF:Yep, the ground effect does make a difference in reducing the angle of attack but that can mean the machine needs a relatively short undercarriage rather than a long one. The landing attitude is less nose up for the same lift and drag that would apply at altitude, the opposite of what you've implied(?). I'm simply asserting that the stick need not necessarily be right on the back stop for a 3 pointer. For a given sink rate (approachin 0) and landing speed the weght of the machine will affect the angle of attack required which will in turn affect the landing attitude and stick position, all things being equal, since the flight path is essentially horizontal.

[Them thar hills]

Chuck E
I definitely mean "feel" the aircraft begin to sink. How else would you know when to squeeze the stick gently back ??
May feel a fairly firm landing rather than a greaser but the object is to dissipate energy in the hold-off so once down it stays down.
Trundling onto the ground with the stick somewhere aft, in the hope a 3 pointer may happen isn't how to get the right result.
This may work on smooth strips but bumps etc will almost certainly cause a bounce.
Short landings are something else entirely.
TTH

[Chuck Ellsworth]

T.T.H. :

I am having difficulty with your description on how to land.

What do you mean by "feel" the airplane sink?

Do you mean pump the stick back and forth so the airplane sinks in jerky movements like it is going down a set of stairs? Or do you mean you "feel" the sinking sensation physically like with your eyes closed?

I am not trying to be difficult it is just that I do not understand your description regarding "feeling sink".

So please describe exactly how you determine when it is about to touch down.

Thanks. :confused:

Cat Driver:

[FlyingForFun]

I think what I do is wait until I have a gut feeling that I'm starting to sink, then gradually ease back to prevent that sinking feeling. I suspect this is where the word "feel" comes into play. But of course visual clues will probably provide most of the input to this gut "feeling". Perhaps this is where the confusion is???

FFF
-------------

[nonradio]

I think that Chuck is merely trying to confirm (tongue in cheek) that we all judge sink rates by looking out of the window and assessing perspective changes. Unless of course there are some people who really do use the 'force' or other such 'feeling':D

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Nonradio:

Exactly. :D

Visual clues, or looking in the correct area ahead or ahead to the side is the "ONLY" way accurate height and sink judgement is possible.

The correct area to center your sight is at that point on the runway where apparent movement stops. ( that point ahead of you where the runway markings seem to lose their appearance of movement, this will vary in direct perportion to your speed. The higher your speed the further down the runway apparent movement will be.

The best method for identifying this apparent movement picture is to watch movies or videos of different airplanes landing, the faster the airplane the further ahead the runway movement picture will be.

By making this area the center of your sight line pheripheral vision will then fill in the correct height judgement skills.

Looking to close or to far ahead degrades your ability to accurately judge height.

There another good samaritan act on my behalf. :D :D

Cat Driver:

:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

[slim_slag]

SSD

For a wheeler.... AS the aeroplane slows, keep straight with rudder... Gradually ease the stick further and further forward as you slow, to maintain the tail-high attitude. Eventually you will run out of forward stick and the tail will gently descend to the ground.

One has to be careful on the ground with these beasts, especially when the airspeed over the control surfaces is not enough to hold the tail up. The same principle applies to the rudder, and more than one person has ended up in the dirt when a gust of wind has arrived from nowhere, and there is not enough airflow over a fully deflected rudder to keep the monster on the centreline.

Sometimes it might be sensible to smoothly bring the tail down yourself while you are carrying a little bit of speed. It still looks and feels good! Taildraggers are always waiting for that moment to let the pilot know he/she is not as smart as they think :)

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Slim_Slag

I wouldn't recommend any try this unless they are very familiar with their aeroplane - you need to feel 'part of it'.

I only use the 'come to a stand with the tail still up' tecnique in very strong steady (non gustly) winds blowing straight down the runway. At ALL other times with 'wheelers' I'd lower the tail during the roll-out - but you have to do this with care of course; if done too soon (ie too fast an airspeed), the increase in A of A can get you airbourne again!

But I prefer 3-pointers if conditions permit ;~)

Also, the Chipmunk has excellent differential wheelbrakes. Once the airspeed is too low for effective flight control, the brakes will keep you on the centreline (but are rarely, if at all, needed other than for taxying) so long as you don't suffer from lazy feet - but that would be a problem for rudder control, as well.


SSD