Tailwheel techniques
I agree with what's been said about the Pitts.
I think I've said this before somewhere, it'll do what you tell it to, you just have to tell it to do the right things. You can't see much out the front but I'd mucher rather be landing a Pitts in a strong crosswind than a C172.
I'm not really sure what the point of wheeling a Pitts is. Forward vis isn't improved much, it's less stable, and for me, 2 pointing it (one main and the tailwheel) in a crosswind was much better than the "three dogs barking" technique.
I found landing a cub with heel brakes in a crosswind more challenging than the Pitts. It's difficult to get some brake in if full ruder isn't keeping you straight, particularly as you approach taxi speed.
The hairiest would probably be the Tiger Moth, there've been a few times where I've run out of aileron and the wing keeps lifting. The saving grace of course is that it can be landed across the runway if required into a strong crosswind. You don't really need a runway as such, just a bit of clear apron.
I think I've said this before somewhere, it'll do what you tell it to, you just have to tell it to do the right things. You can't see much out the front but I'd mucher rather be landing a Pitts in a strong crosswind than a C172.
I'm not really sure what the point of wheeling a Pitts is. Forward vis isn't improved much, it's less stable, and for me, 2 pointing it (one main and the tailwheel) in a crosswind was much better than the "three dogs barking" technique.
I found landing a cub with heel brakes in a crosswind more challenging than the Pitts. It's difficult to get some brake in if full ruder isn't keeping you straight, particularly as you approach taxi speed.
The hairiest would probably be the Tiger Moth, there've been a few times where I've run out of aileron and the wing keeps lifting. The saving grace of course is that it can be landed across the runway if required into a strong crosswind. You don't really need a runway as such, just a bit of clear apron.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First flight in a Tiger, we had a slight quartering tailwind and the (very experienced) instructor had us almost ploughing up the runway lights as we did a touch and go! The school I was flying with teaches wheelers only in the Tigers, to ensure maximum rudder effectiveness. Tiger is a big pussy (in light winds, anyway). The hardest thing was the lack of braking whilst taxying the version I flew - which had no main wheel brakes and just a small drum brake on the tailwheel. Interesting....
There have been a couple of comments about tailwheel first touchdowns in the Pitts. In my S-2C, at least, that's what I aim for and what the POH advises. It helps straighten out the touchdown and gives a better AoA in the flare, which means a gentler landing and less chance of the slalom down the runway that comes from landing with drift on.
I wouldn't suggest wheeling on a Pitts unless you had to ( I know a couple of pilots who had screws jammed in the elevator bell crank and didn't have enough back stick to flare properly - so they had to do a long shallow approach and wheel it on - they had no choice, apart from a parachute descent. The Pitts has a very high sink rate, power off, so you need to manage a fair bit of power to achieve a glide path that's flat enough to avoid the Mother of All Bounces (MOAB)...which means that you're (a) rather too fast and (b) you can see even less ahead than normal.
There have been a couple of comments about tailwheel first touchdowns in the Pitts. In my S-2C, at least, that's what I aim for and what the POH advises. It helps straighten out the touchdown and gives a better AoA in the flare, which means a gentler landing and less chance of the slalom down the runway that comes from landing with drift on.
I wouldn't suggest wheeling on a Pitts unless you had to ( I know a couple of pilots who had screws jammed in the elevator bell crank and didn't have enough back stick to flare properly - so they had to do a long shallow approach and wheel it on - they had no choice, apart from a parachute descent. The Pitts has a very high sink rate, power off, so you need to manage a fair bit of power to achieve a glide path that's flat enough to avoid the Mother of All Bounces (MOAB)...which means that you're (a) rather too fast and (b) you can see even less ahead than normal.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I got to have a go at wheeling the Pitts (S-2B) a couple of weeks ago and I have to say that it was not as difficult as I thought it would be. Mind you I did only get on landing without at least a small bounce
.
Agree with everything people have said about the Pitts here. Due to control effectiveness it is fairly easy to keep straight and as was also said it will do exactly what you tell it to do. So make sure you tell it the right things.
How about this for controversy, the Pitts is one of the best short field aircraft around!!! I went up with a mate who is an instructor and a very experienced Pitts pilot and he got me to do some short field work in the Pitts and I must say the Pitts is an AWESOME short field aircraft. I got the landings down to about 250m without heavy braking and the instructor had the aircraft stopped in what must have been no more than 200m, again with less than maximum braking. He reckons he has stopped it in less than 150m. And from what I saw I have no reason to doubt a good pilot could do this.
As to the C180, well I took that for a session of circuits for the first time a couple of weeks ago and found it much harder than the Pitts primarily because I was used to only small inputs of rudder in the Pitts, but the 180 requires relatively manful amounts of control inputs to achieve the same effect. I found flying the Pitts had made my legs rather lazy again (notice I didn't say feet)...
Cheers
CB
.Agree with everything people have said about the Pitts here. Due to control effectiveness it is fairly easy to keep straight and as was also said it will do exactly what you tell it to do. So make sure you tell it the right things.
How about this for controversy, the Pitts is one of the best short field aircraft around!!! I went up with a mate who is an instructor and a very experienced Pitts pilot and he got me to do some short field work in the Pitts and I must say the Pitts is an AWESOME short field aircraft. I got the landings down to about 250m without heavy braking and the instructor had the aircraft stopped in what must have been no more than 200m, again with less than maximum braking. He reckons he has stopped it in less than 150m. And from what I saw I have no reason to doubt a good pilot could do this.
As to the C180, well I took that for a session of circuits for the first time a couple of weeks ago and found it much harder than the Pitts primarily because I was used to only small inputs of rudder in the Pitts, but the 180 requires relatively manful amounts of control inputs to achieve the same effect. I found flying the Pitts had made my legs rather lazy again (notice I didn't say feet)...
Cheers
CB
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Happy Jack, I forgot to add, i'll be out at the airfield on Saturday morning. If you are there, I'll drop over and say g'day. I've got a couple of friends I am taking up in the Pitts.
Cheers
CB
Cheers
CB
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What time? I was going out this morning but saw wind forecasts of 15G25 and severe turbulence and decided on discretion. Hopefully the wx will be better at the weekend.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Perth Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"So what's the short field technique for a Pitts?"
I can't speak for Cloudbasher, but for me in a single seat Pitts; steep forward-slip glide approach with minimal power, maintain cross-control to just before touch-down, kick it straight and stick back. Its a bit like riding a rock down, but it works. There may be other techniques, but that was what I used, in fact with a bit more power it was my standard approach, since it gave good forward visibility almost to touchdown, and a sideways Pitts is a very draggy object, so it slows down fast. As others have said here, the Pitts is actually a very nice aircraft to fly, without vices or surprises, if the pilot is adequately experienced, and maintains positive control at all times. I also use a slipping glide approach for the J3, and for the same reason, visibility. The J3 is fundamentally different to the later Super Cub, and is solo'd from the rear. It has even less visibility than the Pitts, as it is a cabin type. AerocatS2A 's earlier comment on Cub brakes is spot-on, and even more so in a J3 from the rear, as the heel brakes are pretty much under the front seat, and if your feet are bigger than a size 10 you can forget about reaching them. Even if you do reach them they are basically useless. Unlike the Supercubs Cleveland's, the J3's operate by inflating an expanding rubber doughnut against the linings, and won't hold much beyond 1000rpm.
EDIT - Quote inserted.
I can't speak for Cloudbasher, but for me in a single seat Pitts; steep forward-slip glide approach with minimal power, maintain cross-control to just before touch-down, kick it straight and stick back. Its a bit like riding a rock down, but it works. There may be other techniques, but that was what I used, in fact with a bit more power it was my standard approach, since it gave good forward visibility almost to touchdown, and a sideways Pitts is a very draggy object, so it slows down fast. As others have said here, the Pitts is actually a very nice aircraft to fly, without vices or surprises, if the pilot is adequately experienced, and maintains positive control at all times. I also use a slipping glide approach for the J3, and for the same reason, visibility. The J3 is fundamentally different to the later Super Cub, and is solo'd from the rear. It has even less visibility than the Pitts, as it is a cabin type. AerocatS2A 's earlier comment on Cub brakes is spot-on, and even more so in a J3 from the rear, as the heel brakes are pretty much under the front seat, and if your feet are bigger than a size 10 you can forget about reaching them. Even if you do reach them they are basically useless. Unlike the Supercubs Cleveland's, the J3's operate by inflating an expanding rubber doughnut against the linings, and won't hold much beyond 1000rpm.
EDIT - Quote inserted.
Last edited by VH-BOX; 2nd Aug 2007 at 06:04.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1245499/L/
So what's the technique here?
Bit of left aileron and rudder might get us going back the other way???
So what's the technique here?
Bit of left aileron and rudder might get us going back the other way???
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also fly a Pitts S-2B for fun and the technique I use to pull the aircraft up quick is essentially about 75kts on final and a side slip with a little bit of power. You are just about in the landing attitude at 75kts and I fly it down to about a foot off the deck, cut any power, apply full backstick and as soon as you touch jump hard on the brakes (never even felt the tail rise on this ever!). Doing this and getting it stopped in 150m is emminently doable. Main problem with this technique is if you have an engine failure on final it is very very easy to find yourself on the backside of the power curve with no altitude left to drop the nose to regain the airspeed. However if you need to get a Pitts down and stopped it works a treat! And also at this low speed I have NEVER had a bounce and as long as you touch down straight, then the aircraft rolls dead straight with no work required on the pedals until down through about 30 kts.
Mr Bomb
Mr Bomb
Silly Old Git
Thread Starter
This shows the good viz over the nose of a P51 on approach, just like a Chipmunk
Dont care much for the Skandihooligan vether ja?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwEy4x88d0Y
Dont care much for the Skandihooligan vether ja?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwEy4x88d0Y
Bf109g-6
Mr Bomb
I have tried this sort of approach in the Pitts, works nicely but the owner doesn't like it
Didn't think about an engine failure
How is this for a tricky tailwheel?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nj77mJlzrc&NR=1
I have tried this sort of approach in the Pitts, works nicely but the owner doesn't like it
Didn't think about an engine failure
How is this for a tricky tailwheel?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nj77mJlzrc&NR=1
Last edited by Trojan1981; 17th Oct 2007 at 07:02. Reason: adding more info
