How many Flight Instructors are afraid of tailwheel airplanes?
Afraid of taildraggers? No.
Would I teach in one right now? Also 'No'. My tailwheel time is too little & too long ago for me to consider myself competent to teach circuits in them at the moment.
Give me some time to refresh my skills however...
Would I teach in one right now? Also 'No'. My tailwheel time is too little & too long ago for me to consider myself competent to teach circuits in them at the moment.
Give me some time to refresh my skills however...
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: too near London
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuck: It's not a function of fear, it's a function of street cred! The aviation world is formed of, essentially, two camps: Thems what salivate over shiny, big , fast Modern kit and who really are just not interested in old stuff, and thems what are green with envy at what, for example,you fly (have flown)! It's the same reason that Transair pilot shop is so successful.
In addition, do you know how much 800 x 4 tyres and tubes cost these days?
In addition, do you know how much 800 x 4 tyres and tubes cost these days?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nonradio:
I put the word "fear" in there to see what reaction I would get from all the Instructors.
I am only playing around with their egos.
Cat Driver
I put the word "fear" in there to see what reaction I would get from all the Instructors.
I am only playing around with their egos.
Cat Driver
Guest
Posts: n/a
NonRadio
I guess you are right when you say there are lots of folks who salivate over those stinky new airplanes with all their glow- winky cockpit gadjets and lights, but I bet when the the last " modern jet " gets flown into the bone yard a DC 3 will be there to pick up the crew
I guess you are right when you say there are lots of folks who salivate over those stinky new airplanes with all their glow- winky cockpit gadjets and lights, but I bet when the the last " modern jet " gets flown into the bone yard a DC 3 will be there to pick up the crew
The RAF used Chipmunks for ab-initio training for direct entrant pilots up to 1993. One of the reasons (apart from that it was an excellent elementary training aircraft - the best I have instructed on IMHO) was that it was a handful on the ground and would sort out those who were going to make as RAF pilots - or not.
Groundlooping was common and many students did it. I must have seen about five from the rear seat. The aircraft was so strong that it coped. The ground engineer's post groundloop check was a cursory look followed by "It's OK".
As about half of the RAF pilots trained between 1984 and 1993 went through EFTS at Swinderby, there are more tailwheel trained pilots out there than you would probably think.
Groundlooping was common and many students did it. I must have seen about five from the rear seat. The aircraft was so strong that it coped. The ground engineer's post groundloop check was a cursory look followed by "It's OK".
As about half of the RAF pilots trained between 1984 and 1993 went through EFTS at Swinderby, there are more tailwheel trained pilots out there than you would probably think.
A Few Aussie Observations on Subject
The comments about runways and crosswinds are true for here too. It's just too difficult. Friend of mine tried it, and lost both aircraft to groundloops. I think a lot of the problem is related to traffic induced 'rushing' the approach and arrival. In the good old days,(when I learned to fly at Archerfield,Qld), it was an allover field, radio control minimal,and t/w aircraft had no problems.
For the last 12 years, I've specialised in tailwheel conversions,plus low level training at a non-radio, no traffic site with 15 different strips,(200m to 800m). We have used a C152 Texas Taildragger for 300 hrs, but it wasn't a success, and we changed over to a C170A, which is just delightful. I also have a 160HP Supercub online, and this is a neat little trainer. Just to complete the range, I have a 180HP/CSU VANS RV-6, which I don't rent, but will allow some ICUS time in.
We enjoy the luxury of being able to train at our own pace, and I'm able to select the x/w, the strip 'difficulty', and nominate the type of landing at will. Being able to roll out to a full stop, then make a 180, and taxi back to go, all the while discussing the performance, means the student learns so much better. No pressure - other than the actual job at hand.
The other aspect about t/w training is that in our system, there is no requirement to send the student off solo in order to complete the type endorsement. There was - back in the good old days, and this ensured that instructors were considerably more thorough than I think they are at present. Luckily, we've negotiated a better insurance deal, and so I do send students off solo if the conditions are suitable, and we can select an into wind strip. I find that a few circuits solo is great for their confidence, and we can then get stuck into the crosswind training. I feel this solo really helps.
Unless the instructor is good and current on t/w types, it's suicidal to try instructing on them. Many have tried, and the majority have bent something. You really need to be flying one every week or so - which is again my good luck, as I use the 170 for about 200 hrs annually flying into farms to consult to clients. I do not subscribe to the ability, under our CAO's, of an instructor being immediately able to endorse on t/w type once they themselves have been endorsed. It's crazy thinking on the part of our CASA to allow it.
Does t/w flying improve a pilot's skills? Too right it does! I get great satisfaction from converting the '2 left feet', 'Piper feet', or '2 on the floor' brigade into real pilots. The big grin after the first solo is one of the more satisfying aspects of t/w training.
Tailwheels forever! Cheers,
The comments about runways and crosswinds are true for here too. It's just too difficult. Friend of mine tried it, and lost both aircraft to groundloops. I think a lot of the problem is related to traffic induced 'rushing' the approach and arrival. In the good old days,(when I learned to fly at Archerfield,Qld), it was an allover field, radio control minimal,and t/w aircraft had no problems.
For the last 12 years, I've specialised in tailwheel conversions,plus low level training at a non-radio, no traffic site with 15 different strips,(200m to 800m). We have used a C152 Texas Taildragger for 300 hrs, but it wasn't a success, and we changed over to a C170A, which is just delightful. I also have a 160HP Supercub online, and this is a neat little trainer. Just to complete the range, I have a 180HP/CSU VANS RV-6, which I don't rent, but will allow some ICUS time in.
We enjoy the luxury of being able to train at our own pace, and I'm able to select the x/w, the strip 'difficulty', and nominate the type of landing at will. Being able to roll out to a full stop, then make a 180, and taxi back to go, all the while discussing the performance, means the student learns so much better. No pressure - other than the actual job at hand.
The other aspect about t/w training is that in our system, there is no requirement to send the student off solo in order to complete the type endorsement. There was - back in the good old days, and this ensured that instructors were considerably more thorough than I think they are at present. Luckily, we've negotiated a better insurance deal, and so I do send students off solo if the conditions are suitable, and we can select an into wind strip. I find that a few circuits solo is great for their confidence, and we can then get stuck into the crosswind training. I feel this solo really helps.
Unless the instructor is good and current on t/w types, it's suicidal to try instructing on them. Many have tried, and the majority have bent something. You really need to be flying one every week or so - which is again my good luck, as I use the 170 for about 200 hrs annually flying into farms to consult to clients. I do not subscribe to the ability, under our CAO's, of an instructor being immediately able to endorse on t/w type once they themselves have been endorsed. It's crazy thinking on the part of our CASA to allow it.
Does t/w flying improve a pilot's skills? Too right it does! I get great satisfaction from converting the '2 left feet', 'Piper feet', or '2 on the floor' brigade into real pilots. The big grin after the first solo is one of the more satisfying aspects of t/w training.
Tailwheels forever! Cheers,
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RV6-VNE :
Did the Texas Taildragger you used have the original main gear moved foward? Or did you have the later gear they supplied that was long enough to raise the airplane into the proper fully stalled attitude?
As to training with tailwheel airplanes you made very good comments, only one thought that I have is how come when we learned to fly there were only tailwheel airplanes and we flew off paved runways with x/winds with no more accidents than todays schools?
Could it be a state of a mind and instructor competance issue?
Have fun with your RV, the best of the lot out there.
Cat Driver:
Did the Texas Taildragger you used have the original main gear moved foward? Or did you have the later gear they supplied that was long enough to raise the airplane into the proper fully stalled attitude?
As to training with tailwheel airplanes you made very good comments, only one thought that I have is how come when we learned to fly there were only tailwheel airplanes and we flew off paved runways with x/winds with no more accidents than todays schools?
Could it be a state of a mind and instructor competance issue?
Have fun with your RV, the best of the lot out there.
Cat Driver:
Chuck,
My former c152 Texas Taildragger didn't have the so called "Bolen' extended legs and was a real pig to handle. Even had it been so fitted, we discovered that the original conversion had been incorrectly setup with the gear boxes set so as to allow for 'toe-out' of the wheels. This meant it was unusually directionally unstable!!
It was all too much, and after it went into the workshop for some wing repairs, (following an arguement with a gum tree), we put the training wheel back ahead of the pilot.
The c170 is excellent for t/w training. I have it set up on 180 legs with 800 tyres, giving it a 'door sill height' of exactly the same as a c180 or 185. 3 pointers require lots of back elevator, and it's very similar in that respect to the Cub.
We teach every type of landing here, but always use wheelers for crosswinds over 6-8 kts. For very rough or soft strips and where it's into wind, the 3 pointer is good, but requires more judgement from low timers. A slightly 'tail low' wheeler seems the best for students as they still need a little flare,(which they are used to), and it's less disconcerting than the 'no nonsense' wheeler in which you seem to be far too nose low - in the c170 in particular. After a few hours they can handle this approach.
There's quite a lot of stuff re tailwheel training on the International c170 Association, and c180 Association websites. I've modelled my course on a mix of info from agricultural flying courses, what MAF used to teach their Papua New Guinea pilots, and points from other older t/w instructors I've met around Australia and PNG.
cheers,
My former c152 Texas Taildragger didn't have the so called "Bolen' extended legs and was a real pig to handle. Even had it been so fitted, we discovered that the original conversion had been incorrectly setup with the gear boxes set so as to allow for 'toe-out' of the wheels. This meant it was unusually directionally unstable!!
It was all too much, and after it went into the workshop for some wing repairs, (following an arguement with a gum tree), we put the training wheel back ahead of the pilot.
The c170 is excellent for t/w training. I have it set up on 180 legs with 800 tyres, giving it a 'door sill height' of exactly the same as a c180 or 185. 3 pointers require lots of back elevator, and it's very similar in that respect to the Cub.
We teach every type of landing here, but always use wheelers for crosswinds over 6-8 kts. For very rough or soft strips and where it's into wind, the 3 pointer is good, but requires more judgement from low timers. A slightly 'tail low' wheeler seems the best for students as they still need a little flare,(which they are used to), and it's less disconcerting than the 'no nonsense' wheeler in which you seem to be far too nose low - in the c170 in particular. After a few hours they can handle this approach.
There's quite a lot of stuff re tailwheel training on the International c170 Association, and c180 Association websites. I've modelled my course on a mix of info from agricultural flying courses, what MAF used to teach their Papua New Guinea pilots, and points from other older t/w instructors I've met around Australia and PNG.
cheers,
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi again Rv:
Maybe the problem is you were trying to land it the wrong side up, Down Under??
Thanks for the reply, there are several 150 tailwheel conversions here in this part of canada. Some of them have the same handling problems you described, there are two really signifigant problems with these conversions. The most serious being improper toe in / toe out adjustments. The STC that I have on my Aerobat is the last that came out of aircraft Conversion Technologies in California and it is a superb conversion with the long gear and very explicit instructions for wheel alignment. Toe in and toe out must be done with Cessna wedges.
Anyhow as far as I know I have the only Aerobat Tail dragger in Canada I did the conversion myself and for what I want it for it is a lot cheaper than any other little tailwheel areobatic airplane I can find. ( Aerobatic with limitations. )
The Cessna 170 is as you say an excellent trainer I remember flying one of the first to arrive at our airport in 1954, after the Cessna 140 the 170 was really a leap foward.
When I train pilots on different airplanes such as tailwheel and large flying boats I use a video camcorder to video all the approaches and landings.
After the flight it is worth a thousand words to stop the video just when they start to go wrong in a fuc..d up landing. What I do is give them a laser pointer to point to exactly where they were looking and ask them to tell me what they were thinking at that precise moment.
It is flat out the best training aid I have ever used, I got the idea from teaching pilots to land the PBY without getting into porporsing due to incorrect pitch attitude and been using it for years. It is real easy to set up in the Cessna and I control it with the remote, works like a damn.
Then when they finally get it right I let them watch XXX movies on it as a reward.
Nice chatting with you and may run into you next year Down Under.
Cat Driver:
.............
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.
Maybe the problem is you were trying to land it the wrong side up, Down Under??
Thanks for the reply, there are several 150 tailwheel conversions here in this part of canada. Some of them have the same handling problems you described, there are two really signifigant problems with these conversions. The most serious being improper toe in / toe out adjustments. The STC that I have on my Aerobat is the last that came out of aircraft Conversion Technologies in California and it is a superb conversion with the long gear and very explicit instructions for wheel alignment. Toe in and toe out must be done with Cessna wedges.
Anyhow as far as I know I have the only Aerobat Tail dragger in Canada I did the conversion myself and for what I want it for it is a lot cheaper than any other little tailwheel areobatic airplane I can find. ( Aerobatic with limitations. )
The Cessna 170 is as you say an excellent trainer I remember flying one of the first to arrive at our airport in 1954, after the Cessna 140 the 170 was really a leap foward.
When I train pilots on different airplanes such as tailwheel and large flying boats I use a video camcorder to video all the approaches and landings.
After the flight it is worth a thousand words to stop the video just when they start to go wrong in a fuc..d up landing. What I do is give them a laser pointer to point to exactly where they were looking and ask them to tell me what they were thinking at that precise moment.
It is flat out the best training aid I have ever used, I got the idea from teaching pilots to land the PBY without getting into porporsing due to incorrect pitch attitude and been using it for years. It is real easy to set up in the Cessna and I control it with the remote, works like a damn.
Then when they finally get it right I let them watch XXX movies on it as a reward.
Nice chatting with you and may run into you next year Down Under.
Cat Driver:
.............
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Central America
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tail Dragers
Most people don't understand taildragers because they don't have to understand taildragers. But to make yourself a better pilot, go find a taildrager and learn about it (in the classroom first)and then put it in the air with an instructor. It won't take you long to figure it out.
Then...............go fly a Pitts Special....you'll cringe at the thouht of getting in another Nose Drager.
Best Regards.
Chiller
Then...............go fly a Pitts Special....you'll cringe at the thouht of getting in another Nose Drager.
Best Regards.
Chiller
Last edited by Chiller; 11th Oct 2002 at 03:12.
