X/winds and tail wheel airplanes.
 

Seems like this crew just love to dissect the how to land subject so lets explore that art for a while.

When landing a tail wheel airplane on a paved runway in a strong X/wind do you three point it or wheel it on?

And why do you use your preferred method?

P.S. :

I prefer the wheel landing for almost every tail wheel airplane I ever flew.

Can of worms Chuck.:= http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...r-wheeler.html

Either work well on the Chipmunk.

Why should it be a can of worms discussing a subject that is so important?

Cub, Beaver or Skywagon, I like a wheel landing for those conditions.

In my 185, that I've had since 2000, I also use 20 flaps, brakes to aid directional control as necessary and raise the flaps at touchdown so the rudder doesn't blank when the tail drops. The Micro Aero VG's on the vertical also noticeably contribute to directional control. A tail low wheel landing also contributes to enhanced visibility for directional control on a narrow strip.

This should be interesting. Arai installed in the event of :ugh:.

:)

A wheeler gives less angle of attack as you slow down, therefore less chance of the into wind wing lifting.

I 3 point the little airplanes, J3, Champ etc, and wheel land the bigger singles like a Cessna 180/185 in a cross wind, although I usually 3 point those airplanes in calm conditions.

I always wheel land the bigger iron like a Beech 18.

Again I don't think this should be a "right" way "wrong" way discussion. There are advantages and disadvantages to both that need to be understood, but the important thing is to have and practice
the skills to do both well.

Yep. That's it...and to evaluate and apply which techique/configuration works best for the type and conditions at the time.

Chipmunk, Citabria, Scout, Super Cub - always full-flap three-point.
Stearman - three-point, but I haven't yet been faced with any serious cross-winds.

It is imperative for any pilot flying a tail wheel airplane to be equally proficient and equally comfortable with both wheel landings and three point landings.

There a few airplanes that can be quite difficult to land using either method.

The Pitts Special can be difficult to wheel land due to lack of forward vision, therefore lends its self to be easier to three point.

As to difficulty to three point the best example I can think of is the Grumman Turbo Goose because not only is it short coupled there is also the problem of the turbine engines and the power response time lapse issue.

However most common certified airplanes can be landed using what ever method best serves the conditions and the type.

From my own experience in the training business I found that there were more light airplane pilots that were uncomfortable doing wheel landings than doing three point landings.

And that is generally due to poor flight instruction.

In a Jodel DR1050, with a gusting crosswind, I try to stay on centreline with wing down technique; hold off until one mainwheel touches down; wait for other wheels to settle.
(I never kick straight with the Jodel - but often prefer to do so with a Pa28)

Unfortunately finding good tailwheel instruction is getting harder and harder as so few of the, generally younger, folks doing instruction have ever flown a tailwheel aircraft, let alone have enough experience to be competent to instruct on them.

Well the reality is there are still thousands of tail wheel airplanes still flying, which means they are not exactly rare.

Is it to unreasonable to fix the " Hard to find new instructors that can fly a tail wheel airplane " problem by the simple requirement that part of the new flight instructor requirements be they must demonstrate they can fly a tail wheel airplane?

:ugh: :ugh:

Yes but they are extremely rare at fight schools thus ensuring that it is unlikely any new pilots will be exposed to them. Furthermore the chance of a new commercial pilot getting a job actually flying a taildragger is getting pretty remote. Ag flying is much diminished pretty much everywhere and the Cessna 206 and Caravan is now the mainstay of Bush flying in the Northern areas of North America and Africa.

Flight schools follow the market demand and unfortunately tailwheel flying is not in demand.

Sad to say but tailwheel time is becoming like round engine time, a great experience but now very much the exception not the rule.......

Runway length permitting, I leave the flaps up and wheel it on. The extra speed reduces the crosswind component and leaves more Bernoullis flowing over the wings and control surfaces for more control authority.

Having said that, I do the same for aircraft with their tailwheels at the wrong end of the fuselage but choose to use a lower flap setting, rather than no flaps, doing the day job.

in really strong crosswinds wheeling and 3 pointing are both deficient.
(windsock rigidly horizontal at 90 degrees to the strip is what I have in mind.)

into wind wing down, out of wind wheel high in the air and 2 point it on using the tailwheel and the into wind main.
that way the lift from the wing is pointing into wind and opposing drift.
(my tailwheel has a solid link controlling it. no springs or sloppy stuff.)

after touchdown the stick is moved to the aft stop and fully into wind.

Like this?

Similar to a lot of folks, at least in the U.S., not knowing how to drive a car with a manual transmission. What was once the norm is largely now the unknown and often feared. Pity...

Someday, most pilots won't know how to fly steam gauge aircraft. Pity, again...

flyingmac, very close.
austers can be landed like that as well btw.

It is not like tail wheel airplanes are real rare, there are lots of them still flying.

And it is not like the tail wheel airplane is some new invention that only the very skilled can master.

The regulator who sets the standard and issues instructor ratings should at least define the limits of an instructors rating, if the new instructor has never flown a tail wheel airplane then the license should be issued as valid for nose wheel airplanes only.

Then at least tail wheel airplane owners would be able to judge the skills level of a instructor when they are thinking of hiring their services.

Chuck

When I earned my Pvt/Cml/CFI, tailwheel endorsements didn't exist. I was grandfathered in. I basically taught myself to be as proficient as possible before giving instruction. Years later, I wonder how I did it compared to what I know now. :uhoh:

All an instructor needs is a tailwheel endorsement to meet FAA requirements for operation and instruction. The endorsement goes to his pilot's license. While that is not really a solid qualifier for giving tailwheel instruction, neither is being nosewheel qualified in a 206 a qualifier for backcountry instruction with DA and heavy load issues. The "student" should exercise due diligence in finding an instructor, while understanding caveat emptor.

The POH and FAA PTS descriptions of short and soft field operations only scratches the surface of what to do in the backcountry. Unfortunately, that is usually the extent of the run-of-the-mill flight instructor's knowledge and experience.

Hi Desert185 I live just north of you in the Socialist Republic of Canada and thanks to inertia and the lack of neurons our regulator has not got around to requiring an endorsement for tail wheel airplanes.

I used to own a flight school with both fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft and it never ceased to amaze me that the regulator would issue licenses to low time pilots with such limited flying skills you were playing Russian Roulette with your airplanes every time they flew one.

It boggles my mind to see something as common as two little Cessna's sitting out on the ramp, one a Cessna 140 and the other a Cessna 150 and out of say ten instructors at the airport non of them are capable of teaching on the Cessna 140.....

Pathetic state of affairs in my opinion.

Just out of curiosity, what is anyone's preference on short bumpy grass surfaces? Three pointer or wheeler?
I have a number of hours in tailwheel RV's and the Aviat Husky and only done wheelers on smooth metalled surfaces.

I would three point on bumpy grass surfaces.

The Husky will take a bumpy grass surface wheeling on better than the RV, from my experience flying them.

It's just as bad here in UK. Years ago Lancashire Aero Club at Barton had a Citabria on the fleet. It was available for £60 an hour wet, when the club 152s were about £85. But the little taildragger went almost unused as PPLs queued to hire the horrid 152s and ignored the Citabria. For those of us in the Chipmunk group the Citab was an ideal stand-in if our beloved dHC1 was unavailable for any reason.

And IIRC there was only one instructor at LAC who could fly it!

Why is this? Why is the world of PPL training almost 100% nosewheel? Why are almost 100% of PPLs incapable of flying a taildragger?

Pathetic is the word! There are so many fabulous aeroplanes unavailable to the nosewheel-only pilot!

Pathetic just about sums this up SSD.

How did aviation get to the place where so many flight instructors are so poorly trained in airplane handling skills that a Citabria is beyond their ability to fly????

The Citabria is arguably the most docile tail wheel airplane out there.

Sad but true. Probably came about because instructing was used to build hours while waiting for an airline job, badly paid, no respect for those instructors who genuinely tried to do a good job, and no consideration for the paying student by the airline wannabes.

Never flown a Citabria myself, but if I had to vote for world's easiest taildragger I would go for the Pawnee, brilliant tug but a bit heavy on fuel. Or maybe the Wilga, what's more it has a round engine.

Back on topic though, I prefer a wheeler on tarmac in a crosswind in the Super cub, and three point with the Jodel. Just seems more comfortable, I can't really come up with a logical reason. Oh, and I might take out some of the crosswind component on a wide runway by going a bit diagonal. Next problem is taxying with less than efficient brakes in the Cub, with the original bag brakes. Forget it altogether in the 112 with pathetic cable brakes!

I mostly fly off grass, or at the moment, mud. Does anyone have a system for washing the underside of the wing without water running down inside their sleeves?

that is an easy one.

Get someone else to wash it. :E

Do you remember The French Flying Legends Piper.Classique?

Hi Chuck! French Flying Legends a bit before my time in the country.....

No problem..:ok:

I think that your statement is an unfair generalization. The fact that many instructors have no tailwheel time is not that they are incompetent, it is because virtually no flight schools operate tailwheel aircraft.

There are undoubtedly many instructors that have less than impressive aircraft handling skills but there are also lots of young keen instructors that have excellent hands and feet and would have no trouble flying a Citabria if one were actually available to them.....

I know the feeling well. Recently invested (very cheap) in an extendable rod with a pad/cloth on the end. Seems to work pretty well on the underside and keeps you dry and free of other items that stick to aircraft undersides flying from farm strips where livestock graze ;)

And thanks for that piece of advice Chuck. I'll stick with three pointers on the rough strips.

After about 1000 hours on taildraggers, I would strongly discourage anyone new to Xwinds from attempting 3 pointers. Wheeling it on with into wind aileron gives much better control and lowering the tail slowly gives maximum rudder availability. If flaps are fitted, whipping them up on touchdown is the equivalent of lift dump on larger machinery.
One would hope that on most rough grass fields it would be possible to land into wind but the thought of being bounced into the air with stick hard back is not a pleasant one.

Exactly...unless there is a airplane specific reason you should not wheel it on....

...and after around 10,000 hours of tail wheel time I have yet to fly one that could not be wheeled on.

aeroplanes certainly differ.

in my aeroplane (a Wittman W8 Tailwind) I have a solid link to the tailwheel.
so I always get the tailwheel on the ground and nail it there.
then I have absolute control of where the tail is going.

2 pointers in high wind or 3 pointers generally and full aft stick give me best control of the landing.

YMMV (your mileage may vary) :ok:

I fly a Maule MX-7-180 TW in and out of unprepared fields (grass, dirt and sand) and 3 point it every time, the primary reason being when I bought the plane from the factory I took a flight with Mr Ray Maule and he told me to always 3 point it, now i am not sure if that was his best advice in regards to the planes performance or a reflection of my capabilities, but I have followed his advice and it lands like a dream and is very forgiving regardless of how rough the field is.

Everyone has a different view of this topic. I don't have a vast number of hours, but probably over 3000 tail-wheeler landings - they add up quickly when you are towing gliders. ;)

I, and every tow-pilot in my club that I have watched, always three-points, or two-points in significant cross winds, always with full flap. I've never had a problem and none of my colleagues ever admitted to one either. Admittedly mostly on grass, but there were quite a few landings on hard runways.

This includes a long-time club member, now sadly deceased, who had over 10,000 tows in his log book, starting out with a DH 82C. Besides his longevity as a tow-pilot, he is famous for his statement "It's not a rough tow, unless you get rolled inverted by the rotor!" :E

Actually there are a lot of places you can learn to fly taildraggers in the UK now. When I started in the 1980's I had to seek out somewhere and ended up driving from Sussex up to Cambridge as I was determined to learn on them. Now there are schools in most areas that will teach you from the start if you want. Unfortunately, not all the instructors around now are that proficient to teach anything more than the basics though! I was fortunate as my instructor was an ex Lancaster pilot!

SS

Oh and whilst I prefer tail down in most instances I prefer a wheeler and wing down in strong crosswinds ... usually! :ok:

And that is because it is the safest way to do it......

......it is one of the basics of airplane handling fundamentals.

What really puzzles me is why so many pilots do not understand this.