yep, with wind down windows and all !

185Skywagon wrote

get a load of the tail moment on the 195 !!

Scary photo Brian

I woder how the Ercoupe manged with them ? As I recall it didn't have any rudder pedals....just interconnects to the ailerons.

I always thought it was the short coupled taildraggers that were 'a bit stroppy' - because the rudder didn't have the 'arm' to give leverage:confused:

I think you will find Maules, Pitts etc have a worse reputation for being longitudinally 'hard work' than the Cessnas - what makes the Cessna bum draggers 'challenging' is the sprung steel undercarriage.

I think you are confusing aft CofG with length of fuselage...its just an empty metal tube unless you shove too much stuff in it. A C185 with a CofG on the aft limit is a different beast to one flown empty. Things get REAL interesting when you select flaps 30 or 40 and the control column hits the fwd stop, and stays there until you select less flap:uhoh:

The 195 is a delightful aircraft - easier to fly in many respects than the 185 - the view fwd and right on the ground is near non existent and the flaps delightfully useless in that they produce no extra lift and just barely enough drag to warrant their inclusion - but a fun aeroplane that simply oozes class.

If I wanted a classic tailwheel aircraft purely as a personal get about between reasonable (length) runways I would chose the 195 - if I wanted to haul stuff and/or operate into short/rough strips it would be the 185.

yes it's really the relationship of the cg VS the pivot point (being the main wheels).

The Cessna TW series were generally characterised by having the main gear a LONG way ahead of the CG.
Even worse as Chimbu points out with (usually) over gross weight .

I guess thats why you could virtually stand on the brakes hard on landing without worrying about tipping over.
Try that on a Tiger with brakes and it's over you go.

I believe the Army had xwind gear on their 180's along with 10" rims, for a while.

What I think I am really talking about is arm/moment when it does get out of shape. As I said, I don't have any experience with any short fuse TW aircraft
I am not an instructor or teacher. I go to work and do what I have to do, to avoid bending it.
I'll defer to CC for any explanations.

That agrees with my understanding, although I have not flown a Maule.

Dr :8

Chimbu, interesting stuff. Haven't flown a 180/185, but it's interesting to hear people's thoughts on how differcult these taildragger machines are or could be. Lots think the Pitts is nasty, and dangerous, and scary. It isn't. I have a mate who has 500hrs+ in 185s and reckons the pitts must be ghastly, I have a reasonable amount of time in the Pitts and reckon the 185 with a full load must keep things bloody interesting! Most two hole pitts have the factory bungy gear, but a single seater I have flown had the aluminium gear, and boy, what a stroppy wee so and so (under 1000Ibs with 180hp...) compared to the heavier and much easier S2A/B - but you get used to it!

I am guessing that with the bungy gear on the 180/185, this makes them more interesting with heavy loads on board? Interesting...

Most people seem to think that taildraggers are horribly scary, particularly Pitts or whatever, I personally find the Pitts easier to land in a howling crosswind than any others (Citabria, cub, Maule or Tiger etc) because they have so much directional control, in fact, they have so much control in all three axis right down practically to taxiing!

Must have a go in a 185, see what fun I have been missing out on! :ok:

And a few other yarns as well over a glass of red so I hear.

Pitts was a bad example to use of 'short coupled' because it has such huge and effective flight controls - particularly in the tail. I was think too of earlier model Maules like the M4 which were short bodied and had smaller rudders than later models like the M7. Other examples of 'short coupled' are Luscombes and maybe even the Auster.

Another example of a tricky tw is the Helio - very long arm (tail cone) and very tall, but narrow chord, vertical stab/rudder with only a demonstrated crosswind limit of 7kts - perhaps more to do with the bizarre low speeds the thing was capable of. It too was fitted sometimes with crosswind gear.

I have so few Pitts (S2a) hours logged so long ago as to be meaningless - but my abiding memory was of SO MUCH control authority that over controlling was the first hurdle to overcome. Didn't take long but it was the first issue flying it. You thought it and it happened - if you actually moved the controls it was too much:ok:

185s/180s loaded and on tarmac can be challenging - in my view it is mostly down to the sprung steel main undercarriage - on grass the twisting that goes on (in the main gear legs) helps but on tarmac it sends you off in all sorts of unpredictable directions until you get on top of the aircraft. Quick feet required more than other taildraggers - WAY more than oleo taildraggers I have flown like the Winjeel.

Nothing about the 195 says 'easier' but it is - I have yet to decide exactly why. I suspect it is because the flaps are so useless it requires a flatter approach to control speed - its like landing a 185 flapless - which tends to be easier. My mate who owns the 195 thinks so too - before flying his new pride and joy he went out in another mate's 180 to get his eye back in - lots of TW time just not a lot in the previous 15+ years - he came back with that wild eyed, rung out, soaked in sweat look that a challenging aeroplane can produce in the less than current - and was much relieved when he flew the 195.

Well, we will have to bring Feeney to the mountain


http://www.aerohub.co.nz/wp-content/...iautumn-61.jpg

AeroHub » “Anatomy of an Accident”

Better break out the white wine then - or hide it:}

Feeney will find it.......


http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/tinpis/feeney.jpg

"Men of Harlech stop your dreaming can't you see their spear points gleaming....'

Certainly a character:ok: **** singer but:E

Good old Mike......where is he at these days?

Probably still props the bar at the WAC http://www.augk18.dsl.pipex.com/Smileys/beer3.gif
Here when the site is up... www.aerohub.co.nz

I emailed Fearless and received this back this afternoon:}

I'll see if I can help with his login:ok:

He also sent me this pic of him instructing some poor hapless soul in the dark art.

http://www.fototime.com/{69A10804-52...e%20strip..jpg

Yeh get the Feen in here :ok:
He is a veritable FOUNTAIN

He's still got that moustache I think, tho it may have changed colour a little since that pic was taken.

I think the fact that he was 18 approximately 104 years ago has escaped him:}