Are the brakes "useless" on Tiger Moths?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are the brakes "useless" on Tiger Moths?
Tiger Moth equipped with tailwheel and wheel brakes modification and used for joy flights in southern Victoria. . The owner states the brakes are useless;.meaning one supposes, the brakes are U/S. Was that snag in the MR? Probably not; otherwise the operator could not legally fly the the machine. . Of course the brakes are useless if they don't get maintained properly..
. Which begs the question how is that Tiger Moth steered and brought to a halt if the brakes don't work properly? A tail skid on the original type was a rudimentary form of braking as it dug into grass surface and even on hard surface its friction slowed up the machine. With a tail wheel replacing the tail skid, then brakes are needed to not only steer and aid directional control in crosswinds,but more importantly for stopping..
If, as the owner operator states, the brakes are "useless," then surely by any definition the aircraft is un-airworthy and should not be flown; let alone with a fare paying passenger. Presumably Tiger Moth brakes worked as advertised when installation took place and aircraft was test flown. Or was the design considered "useless" right from first installation? .
. Which begs the question how is that Tiger Moth steered and brought to a halt if the brakes don't work properly? A tail skid on the original type was a rudimentary form of braking as it dug into grass surface and even on hard surface its friction slowed up the machine. With a tail wheel replacing the tail skid, then brakes are needed to not only steer and aid directional control in crosswinds,but more importantly for stopping..
If, as the owner operator states, the brakes are "useless," then surely by any definition the aircraft is un-airworthy and should not be flown; let alone with a fare paying passenger. Presumably Tiger Moth brakes worked as advertised when installation took place and aircraft was test flown. Or was the design considered "useless" right from first installation? .
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe have a go in it and you will get exactly what they mean. The brakes are only there to hold the thing stationary at idle.
Last edited by CAVOK92; 22nd Mar 2019 at 02:45.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Up The 116E, Stbd Turn at 32S...:-)
Age: 81
Posts: 3,053
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Re
'They are easy as with or with out brakes..... '
Except when operating on sealed runways ……
On grass / gravel, especially into wind, brakes / no brakes - doesn't matter much, except for taxying - IMHO
Cheers.
'They are easy as with or with out brakes..... '
Except when operating on sealed runways ……
On grass / gravel, especially into wind, brakes / no brakes - doesn't matter much, except for taxying - IMHO
Cheers.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Downunder
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you'll find it was just a turn of phrase. Tiger brakes are indeed pretty use-less (in the literal sense of not being of use) in its natural environment of grass fields and chocked run-ups. As a result, apart from in Canada, they weren't fitted. Low landing speed, friction and drag are quite sufficient for a short stop, and a burst of power together with the tail skid linked to the rudder gives sufficient steering authority on the ground. On the other hand, if using a "modern" hard runway, especially in a crosswind, you can easily go for a wander and it's best to keep the tail up as long as possible. Thankfully, such runways tend to be long so stopping is less of an issue than keeping straight!
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by CAVOK92
Maybe have a go in it and you will get exactly what they mean. The brakes are only there to hold the thing stationary at idle.
kaz
kaz
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going back a few years both in the RAAF and civilian flying schools, it was considered good airmanship (Oops sorry! NTS or Non Technical Skills) to employ two wing walkers when Tiger Moths were taxying close to people or buildings. In other words someone on each wing tip to help guide the machine. With known crook brakes and a tail wheel on Australian registered Tiger Moths, it would be a good flight safety precaution I would have thought to employ someone to do the job. Offer them a free ride at the end of the day or better still pay them..
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Mordor
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Max Tow
The brakes go with a tailwheel, if I understand correctly, so getting far too complex for me!
PDR
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do either of the last two posters actually know anything about Tigers? Wing walkers are only necessary in windyconditions and the undercarriage mods were only a standard characteristic ofCanadian built Tigers
Originally Posted by Vag277
Do either of the last two posters actually know anything about Tigers? Wing walkers are only necessary in windyconditions and the undercarriage mods were only a standard characteristic ofCanadian built Tigers
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do either of the last two posters actually know anything about Tigers? Wing walkers are only necessary in windy conditions
It doesn't take much imagination to appreciate the danger to life and limb if a brakeless Tiger Moth under the control of an ab-initio solo student gave a burst of throttle at the wrong moment while being marshalled into a parking spot even if nil wind. It was not unknown for an instructor giving dual instruction to ask his student to hop out of the aircraft and guide it by holding the wing tip when approaching the parking area if a wing walker was not readily available. Same at aero clubs. Bankstown for example where the tarmac was sometimes crowded with other aircraft. It doesn't have to be only windy conditions where flight safety has to be considered .
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Proper adjustment is important. If so, the brakes on Canadian Moths work quite well. They will nose you over if applied with the tail still in the air(or at least start raising the tail as I never went onto the nose). They can also save the day on an improper(not straight landing) if they are adjusted so that full rudder input gives a touch of brake. I know that too. They hold the aircraft stationary when doing the run-up.
I suspect it makes operating the type much easier than folks have it in the A model. But i'll take the C model, especially on a cold day. And that canopy really does make it look more pretty doesn't it.
I suspect it makes operating the type much easier than folks have it in the A model. But i'll take the C model, especially on a cold day. And that canopy really does make it look more pretty doesn't it.
mustafa
I flew a J1N, you are spot on, heel brakes, I could never work out of they were working or not! Luckily I was on grass most of the time, I had the shock of my life when I landed on a sealed runway one day!
As I recall it, the brakes on Auster J series weren't worth a pinch of pelican poop either. Heel brakes FFS. Lucky that landing speeds were low.
