logging tailwheel hours
 

A friend has a tailwheel, and has asked if I want to do some flying.

I hold ppl A, but have no tailwheel endorsement - am I allowed to log the hours?

Sam.

Yes ... but in what capacity would you log them if you did?

You could log P u/t but not P1 as you can't fly solo ... but wait :eek: You could agree prior to the flight to fly a portion of it in command which I think you could log P1, but then take off and and landing would have to be Pu/t ..... errr, I guess? Only one of you can log P1 and P2 is for the "big boys" with multi crew. I think a qualified pilot can log Pu/t with a non FI PPL, but a student can't.

Confusing innit? :rolleyes:

No, don't think so. A tailwheel is identified as an aircraft variant that requires differences training and sign-off by a qualified instructor. Until that time you cannot act as PIC on such an aircraft, not even just in the air (with your buddy acting as PIC for take-off and landing).

If your buddy is a tailwheel FI (or CRI, possibly?), then you can log Pu/t while he logs P1. Otherwise, I fear your logbook has to stay empty.

I've been in the exact same situation where a friend (who has a tailwheel endorsement) asked me to go for a ride in a Cup a month or two ago. Very interesting, loads of fun, but I've got nothing to show for it in my logbook.

Backpacker,

You went flying in a "Cup" ? Was it attached to a flying saucer???? :p

Sorry, could'nt resist it....

Agree with BackPacker 100%. You're not qualified to fly the aircraft, so unless your friend is qualified to instruct you on the aircraft, you can't log the time.

However, if you want to keep a record of your flight, LASORS allows you to record it in your logbook. Your capacity for the flight should be recorded as "SNY" (supernumary), and the hours must not be added to your totals.

Enjoy it!

FFF
------------

Oh, man. The first spelling mistake I've made in months, and somebody notices...:ugh:

Anyway, it was a Piper J3C Cub, PH-GEN. No saucers attached. I think it's actually fully original without any electrics (except a semi-portable radio on a battery), but it does have a tailwheel instead of a skid. (It's based at a field with tarmac, so I guess that makes sense.)

I now know what "adverse yaw" is...:}

Log books are maintained in accordance with Article 35 of the ANO not LASORs which is only a guidance document. Its your logbook and as such you can do what you like with it so long as you comply with Art 35. Fully agree with Backpacker.

All this talk about rules and regulations excites me, and makes me proud to be a member of a group who end up so paranoid they lose track of the simple fact tail wheel airplanes were the norm at one time....

Then came the nose wheel machines and the maintenance companies got a real boost in business with lots of bent fire walls to repair..

Chuck - spot on. Don't forget the shock-loaded engines and wrecked props.:eek:

Don't forget the shock-loaded engines and wrecked props.

That is only a problem at airports where they don't wear Hi Vis vests Shaggy... :E

>>>All this talk about rules and regulations excites me, and makes me proud to be a member of a group who end up so paranoid they lose track of the simple fact tail wheel airplanes were the norm at one time....<<<<


Chuck

Very true, but as someone running a tailwheel group, I've been appalled at the lack of basic landing skill of nose-wheel trained pilots.

One has taken over 25 hours to be sent solo and another 15 hours and even now they still fail to make a decent round-out and touchdown.

I'm not paranoid, and let a lot of basic mistakes go, on the assumption that this is a way of them learning. I've been taken through a wire fence through faulty taxying technique and groundlooped through an inability to recognise a swing on touchdown - oh and these were instructors....

I'm seriously thinking of taking my 'baby' back into sole ownership so if mistakes are made, they are mine. I just can't trust some of the group to do it even half-decently

oh and these were instructors....

Sorry to disagree with you robin, those were not " instructors " they were " Robots " just another product of the nanny state mentality.

I learnt on tailwheel (or rather tailskid "DH82a") and have always landed tailwheel/nosewheel the same way ... or ways. Can't see what all the fuss is about to be honest :ugh:

SS

Out of interest, what is the 'average' time required for a tail wheel endorsement? Vague ballpark?

Sam.

Much as I agree with you Chuck, they did hold an instructors ticket.

I have to say there was a wonderful feeling as my a/c slowed to walking pace then headed off at 90 degrees to the runway, narrowly missing a runway light.

After all the years of being humilated by instructors, just once to get my own back!!!!!

After all the years of being humilated by instructors,

Anyone who teaches by humilitating their students is not an instructor, they are bullies who suffer from a lack of self confidence.

just once to get my own back!!!!!

The best way to handle a bully is smack them in the mouth with your fist....it is not PC but it is effective. :ok:

Being clever can be a bitch that bites sometimes eh!

Sorry Chuck I nearly said aircraft only bite fools!

Exactly so. That clearly demonstrates the big disadvantage of teching people to fly in nosewheel aeroplanes - many are not taught how to land, but the aeroplane lets them get away with it (until the noseleg breaks). A sad reflection of many (by no means all) of today's instructors.

Learn on a taildragger, and the aeroplane will not tolerate sloppy technique.


SSD

25 hours? I would start to question the quality of instruction being given if it was taking someone 25hrs (despite having lots of previous flying experience) to go solo in a basic trainer like the Cub. It's not rocket surgery :rolleyes:.

Exactly, I wish I had learnt on a taildragger. The Cub uncovered a habitual tedency on my part to flare high, which the PA28 had left gone unoticed. GA took a step backwards when the first generation of spamcans were introduced.

Most clubs say about 5hrs. I think that's a little optimistic though, with perhaps 8-10hrs to get really happy with the plane being more realistic. Getting a good instructor who is used to teaching in a tandem is very important.