Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Private Flying
Reload this Page >

Small wheel controversy!

Private Flying LAA/BMAA/BGA/BPA The sheer pleasure of flight.

Small wheel controversy!

Old 11th Aug 2016, 13:41
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 4,680
Small wheel controversy!

I fly at a club which has a very friendly and convivial atmosphere. in fact, it's about the best club I have ever flow with. However, there is one problem, as I seem to frequently create controversy with an opinion I hold. The club has about ten aircraft (not exactly sure how many), of which I have only flown one. This is because it has the small wheel at the end of the aircraft where God intended it to be. At the tail! I refuse to pay to fly any aircraft which is otherwise configured.

In addition, it has a stick and a throttle on the left hand side (also as God intended), with inverted oil and fuel systems - so can be flown upside down (maybe not exactly God's wish - but it's a lot of fun!). On the club's fb page and at social events, I have frequently stated my (correct) opinion on the matter, and it seems to provoke some ire. it seems that there are many pilots out there who don't wish to participate in real flying, and the poor thing remains underutilised and shunned by the rank and file of recreational pilots.

Am I alone in my (correct) opinion?


Last edited by Dan Winterland; 13th Aug 2016 at 05:32. Reason: Spliing!
Dan Winterland is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 13:48
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Oxfordshire
Age: 49
Posts: 470
Can you clarify which God - there are so many to choose from, so we should be clear before we start argu... discussing.
glum is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 13:54
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: In front of a computer
Posts: 1,860
No - in a former life I instructed at a club that operated,from time to time, a Chipmunk, then an L4 Grasshopper and the a Citabria 7GcBc. I really look forward to checking the members on these but business was always slow - most preferring the C150/172 flying.

I ended up using them myself on quiet days...
ETOPS is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 14:01
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: London
Age: 51
Posts: 127
sounds like she is yours to appreciate all by yourself. I trust she has 4 wings, as god intended....
Camargue is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 14:34
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,223
I don't see the controversy. If you are of the opinion that "a God" created flying wonders to have their wheel at the tail, just do that. Don't bother that you may have a yoke or stick in your back and you may have trouble looking at the direction of your tail wheel, but a huge windows backwards behind which an engine blows the spirit of God. Just be careful to choose reverse gear for the aircraft with a bigger wheel in the back and the huge windows behind you and let God decide which is better.
ChickenHouse is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 15:23
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Here
Posts: 1,789
Just keep the little wheel behind you and all will be perfect!
Sam Rutherford is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 15:27
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Iraq and other places
Posts: 1,107
I can't really understand people who think that the arrangement of wheels on their airplane is some kind of a big deal. Fly your damn airplane and let everyone else fly their damn airplane. Nobody else cares about your opinion, and there's no reason you should care about theirs!

I fly whatever I feel like flying, no matter where the wheels are. Seems dumb to limit myself.
Katamarino is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 16:02
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 43
Rule No. 1 - DW is always right (Substitute your name here)
Rule No.2 - If in doubt, rule No.1 applies
Rule No.3 - There is no rule No.3
nkt2000 is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 16:13
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,049
Can you clarify which God - there are so many to choose from, so we should be clear before we start argu... discussing.
Surely for Aviation it has to be the FSM!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyi...ghetti_Monster
foxmoth is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 16:27
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 74
Posts: 1,052
You are in a minority of one.
Many pilots like to see where they are going on the ground and like a bit of directional stability when landing in a crosswind. OTOH they miss out on getting into some rough old short strips but life is a compromise so wibble flip........
The Ancient Geek is online now  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 16:32
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 13,637
You are wrong Dan, because all flying is good - after that it's a matter of detail.


The two most fun aeroplanes in my logbook - a BAe Hawk and Scottish Aviation Bulldog both had a training wheel at the front.

Close behind, the Chipmunk and Stinson Voyager both have a tailwheel.

The most boring aeroplane I've ever flown: the C172 has a training wheel, but the scarcely difference C170 doesn't.

All flexwing microlights have a nosewheel, and I defy you to find anything much more fun than throwing a big engined well designed flexwing around for half an hour.

G
Genghis the Engineer is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 16:49
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The Wild West (UK)
Age: 41
Posts: 1,144
If one-upmanship is the name of the game, I think my aircraft was nicer with a skid at the back. A necessity on concrete though.

Seriously, it doesn't really matter. And there's a lot to be said for not having an aircraft that's itching to bite you if you put a foot wrong. I like the aerodynamic and weight benefits of doing without the nosewheel but it's just a design tradeoff against more challenging handling on the ground. People would still fly Pittses if they were made easy to land.

Last edited by abgd; 12th Aug 2016 at 01:55.
abgd is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 16:52
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 79
Posts: 1,436
DW, your club has a friendly an convivial atmosphere.
If you continue to stuff your tailwheel down everyone's throat, that atmosphere may change.
Be thankful for the current atmosphere.
Ask yourself (if you know the answer) how many of your associates CAN fly the tailwheel but choose not to.
I fly a tailwheel, most of my club fly tailwheels, those that don't are not pilloried for it.
If you removed every nosewheel aircraft you would have a lot less chance of flying anything at all.
In a nutshell, Get o'er yerself!
Crash one is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 17:18
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,049
You are in a minority of one.
Whilst i disagree with this, there are many that prefer tailwheel, personally I am happy with either, much more interested in how it handles once off the ground, but I would certainly agree with those that say do not shove it down other peoples throats, sadly most pilots are more interested in an aircraft that gets them from A to B rather than actually enjoying the flying per se.
foxmoth is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 18:11
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Vienna
Age: 46
Posts: 352
Unable to identify the OP's point of this "controversy" post, apart from telling the audience about his special aireligious beliefs. IMHO Katamarino is spot on.

And with a big SCNR up front and showing myself the red card for not playing the ball: some passages from the initial statement suggest that tailwheel aircraft are indeed the safer choice here, because if the pilot's seat were even slightly behind the main gear in a trike, the weight of the ego might tip it on the tail.
Armchairflyer is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 20:44
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,431
Originally Posted by Dan Winterland View Post
Am I alone in my (correct) opinion?
Ah, well, you see, there are those of us who have worked out that if we want to buy weird sick-making G forces [which I personally don't, but some clearly do] it's vastly cheaper to do so at the fairground than by flying aerobatic aircraft.
Gertrude the Wombat is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 21:19
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Scotland
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by :Gengis the Engineer
All flexwing microlights have a nosewheel, and I defy you to find anything much more fun than throwing a big engined well designed flexwing around for half an hour.
Some while ago I saw a flexwing trike, landing at a grass strip, trip over its front wheel rather like a Reliant Robin and wrap itself up in its wing. That rather put me off the things.
DeltaV is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 22:05
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 13,637
Most aeroplanes have some way of crashing!

G
Genghis the Engineer is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2016, 22:52
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Northants
Posts: 24
You are in a minority of one.
Demonstrably untrue!

Dan - Whilst I don't recall such an unequivocal opinion when you flew the Z242L, I am 100% with you regarding the proper configuration of aeroplanes. Some of us grew out of tricycles when we were 3 years old.
XX514 is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2016, 02:16
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 601
If pilots are getting flying, the location of the third wheel is of secondary importance. I have a plane of each type, and enjoy the pleasures of each. That said I do my darnedest to keep the third wheel off the surface as much as possible.

Once you're away from hard surface, taildragger is going to make itself more likeable. Once you go on skis, tailwheel is the only way to go.
9 lives is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.