RV4 3pt vs wheel landings
Dennis
Where can I get more informatin about "3 point" vs "wheel"
landings in the Vans RV4 ?
I have read the "Compleat Taildragger" and he says you must do "wheel"
landings for high crosswind, but then many articles in Plane&Pilot
say many taildraggers are fully controlable down to full stall 3 point
landings and wheel landings may never be needed.. my RV4 seems to be one
of those (so far ..) I sure would like more input as I only have about
50 hrs in taildraggers... all RV4 stories and opinions would be welcome.
Thanks.. DA in GA
Larry Pardue
In article <31B9AF...@mindspring.com>, Dennis
<ange...@mindspring.com> wrote:
I don't have any experience in the RV-4. In my Pacer I always do 3 point
landings except on those once-a-year occasions when I decide to scare
myself and do a wheely. The wheel landings are much less controlable. I
routinely 3 point in gusty crosswinds of over 25 knots (I live in windy
country) and they are absolutely no sweat. With the wheel landings that
is not the case.
To generalize that wheel landings "must" be done in crosswinds, with no
disclaimer as to a particular aircraft type, strikes me as extraordinary
bad advice.
Larry
Pacer N8025D
John R. Johnson
Thats funny Larry, I have found just the opposite in the Pacer's I have
flown! The Pacer is a bit quick on the rudders and brakes and requires
discerning application of both.
The RV series has a spring steel gear. That gear system has a tendency
to make "wheel" landings just a tad bouncy! The shock absorption is less
than wonderful, although the spring action is great.
I have good luck with wheel landings in almost any taildragger by trimming
for 1.3 Vs on approach. Try trimming for your normal approach speed.
Now, leave the trim there.
As you approach the end of the runway do a normal roundout and fly level
over the runway about hip high. You may want to add just a tad of power
to hold your descent rate real low. Ease down gently to the runway.
As soon as the mains touch, relax the back pressure. ( Maintain your
ailerons as you were, just relax the BACK pressure. ) That should be
sufficient to cancel the inertia of the tail and bring it up to a level
attitude. Good view of the runway, huh! :-)
As your speed decays below rotation speed, gently lower the tail onto
the tarmac. Be sure to lower it while you still have enough speed to
lower it gently. If you hold it up as long as you can, it tends to
drop uncontrollably and cause directional instabilities.
The key to a smooth wheelie with bouncy airplanes ( anything with a
spring steel gear ) is to touch down with almost zippo rate of descent.
A slightly tail low attitude is best, but keep the tail OFF the runway.
Hold you attitude after the roundout and control your descent with just
a tiny amount of power. Ease the power out to come down. You should be
holding some backpressure to maintain the landing attitude. This is the
pressure you relax when you hear the wheels squeek. If you bounce, hold
the attitude, lock the stick in place, and ease it down again with a
LITTLE power, not a LOT. Go forward positively at the squeek if you
tend to bounce. You are trying to REDUCE the Angle of Attack so you
won't take off again! Braking can be quite brisk while your speed is
high, but be sure to reduce the braking effort as you lose speed!
The airflow over the elevators will keep the tail down at high speed so
you won't go over on your back. As you get slower it gets easier to put
the tail up too high for comfort.
John
John Collier
In article <discus-1006...@dialup11.pm1.caverns.com>, dis...@caverns.com (Larry Pardue) writes:
>
> To generalize that wheel landings "must" be done in crosswinds, with no
> disclaimer as to a particular aircraft type, strikes me as extraordinary
> bad advice.
>
My personal belief is that this "myth" survives from the time when most of
the airplanes did not have steerable tailwheels and directional control on
the ground at low speed was "iffy" at best, braking was almost non-existant,
etc. For those types that have steerable tailwheels, the 3-point attitude gives
very positive control on the ground so it is possible to do very controllable
3 point landings in strong crosswinds. But, in an airplane with a full swivel
tailwheel that is not attached to the rudder, weathervaning is a real problem.
--
John Collier Voice: 512-823-6236 or t/l 793-6236
IBM Solution Provider Operations Fax: 512-823-6297 or t/l 793-6297
col...@austin.ibm.com
John R. Johnson
On 11 Jun 1996, John Collier wrote:
>
> In article <discus-1006...@dialup11.pm1.caverns.com>, dis...@caverns.com (Larry Pardue) writes:
> >
> > To generalize that wheel landings "must" be done in crosswinds, with no
> > disclaimer as to a particular aircraft type, strikes me as extraordinary
> > bad advice.
> >
> My personal belief is that this "myth" survives from the time when most of
> the airplanes did not have steerable tailwheels and directional control on
> the ground at low speed was "iffy" at best, braking was almost non-existant,
> etc. For those types that have steerable tailwheels, the 3-point attitude gives
> very positive control on the ground so it is possible to do very controllable
> 3 point landings in strong crosswinds. But, in an airplane with a full swivel
> tailwheel that is not attached to the rudder, weathervaning is a real problem.
>
Right. People who are looking for a magic RULE that will make their
decisions for them correctly every time, probably will not find the
rule they are looking for in airplanes. For example, with my airplane,
which has a BIG tail, a full swivel tailwheel with NO locking, and the
worlds first attempt at hydraulic brakes, and two position flaps-- up
and down, an attempted three-point landing in a stiff crosswind with
flaps will GUARANTEE a ground loop. Regardless of pilot capability.
The flaps blanket and disable the rudder in the three point attitude
and the tailwheel is no help at all to hold it because is swivels freely.
In other aircraft I have flown you will lose it if you DON'T get the
tailwheel on the ground immediately! It depends on the airplane and
the conditions. Always a judgement call.
JOhn
Bruce Lowe
re: 3pt vs wheel -
When landing a TD in a stiff crosswind, don't you slip it to stay on
centerline, and with a wing low, do what amounts to a 2-point landing
(i.e., one main and the tailwheel)?
Inquiring minds want to know.
-bcl (25 TD hr neophite, never learned wheel landings)
Dennis
> Right. People who are looking for a magic RULE that will make their
> decisions for them correctly every time, probably will not find the
Thanks for the input but the original post was for
an RV4 (note the title). I have received a lot of general advice but
nothing from any high time RV4 pilots.. but all good stuff anyway..
DA in GA
dave morss
In articl > Thanks.. DA in GA
>
> I don't have any experience in the RV-4. In my Pacer I always do 3 point
> landings except on those once-a-year occasions when I decide to scare
> myself and do a wheely. The wheel landings are much less controlable. I
> routinely 3 point in gusty crosswinds of over 25 knots (I live in windy
> country) and they are absolutely no sweat. With the wheel landings that
> is not the case.
>
> disclaimer as to a particular aircraft type, strikes me as extraordinary
> bad advice.
>
> Pacer N8025D
i agree as in my experience the airplane dictates which landing will be
best not the weather.in my hangar i have an airplane that must allways be
wheel landed and one that must allways be full stalled.(formula one and
fm2)also some that can do both may have structural reasons to prefer one
method over another,both the d 18 twin beech and p 51 can be full stalled
nicely but have had problems with the tail structures and so are usually
wheeled on and the tail lowered gently.
--
myriad research
serving all your flight test needs
John R. Johnson
Right, it was indeed. I tried to help what I could for the RV situation,
but all the high time RV drivers I know are not on the net. I have a
friend who has six or seven hundred hours in RV's. I know he does a
wheel landing every once in a while, if not frequently. I will ask
him. I usually see him on Saturdays, when he drops in with his RV to
check on my hangar progress. :-)
John
Dennis
> sniped..
> Dennis..
> Thanks for the input but the original post was for an RV4 ...
> John..
> I have a friend who has six or seven hundred hours in RV's...
> I will ask him ... I usually see him on Saturdays....
Your reply is very much appreciated.. thanks in advance if
you can talk with him and shed some light... you are right,
most of the high time RV drivers are flying.. not surfing..
Every thing is going good so far but I find holding a wheelie
somewhat of a challange with just a light Xwind so I am hesitant
to try it in more agressive Xwind.. probably just a case of
"low time feet" but I think some RV input would not hurt..
It seems to love 3 pointers.. just nails 'em..
DA in GA
Larry Pardue
Well John, you give us your method of achieving a smooth wheel landing,
but I had thought the issue was crosswind landings. I find my airplane is
much better damped against side gusts with the tailwheel on the ground
than it is with rudder and vertical stabilizer alone resisting the side
pressure.
Larry
Pacer N8025D
In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960610152800.10407A-100000@reliant>, "John R.
Johnson" <jo...@siu.edu> wrote:
Joe Norris
>From: lo...@giraf.zso.dec.com (Bruce Lowe)
>Subject: Re: RV4 3pt vs wheel landings
>Date: 11 Jun 1996 21:47:19 GMT
>When landing a TD in a stiff crosswind, don't you slip it to stay on
>centerline, and with a wing low, do what amounts to a 2-point landing
>(i.e., one main and the tailwheel)?
Yes, that's exactly right! I've made "two point" landings many times. It is
the correct procedure for making X-wind landings in a taildragger. Sometimes,
doing a wheel landing in a very strong X-wind becomes a "one point" landing!
Joe Norris
Central Wisconsin, USA
e-mail: jno...@tznet.com
John R. Johnson
On Wed, 12 Jun 1996, Larry Pardue wrote:
> Well John, you give us your method of achieving a smooth wheel landing,
> but I had thought the issue was crosswind landings. I find my airplane is
> much better damped against side gusts with the tailwheel on the ground
> than it is with rudder and vertical stabilizer alone resisting the side
> pressure.
<snip of all kinds of stuff>
I must admit I haven't flown a Pacer much in the last ten years. However,
I was racing a T-Storm to the end of the runway recently, and I did wheel
it on in a significant crosswind on pavement. I did a NO-NO and drove it
onto the runway at about 80 mph because I was really expediting. The
T-Storm caught me before I could get it back to the hangar! :-)
Most Pacer's have a pretty tight coupling between the rudder and the
steerable tailwheel. If you have a good tailwheel, that couples well
you can indeed gain a lot of stability by planting that tailwheen firmly
onto the runway. I tend to forget that, because the airplane I usually
fly has a "full swivel" tailwheel with NO coupling to the rudder and no
lock. I don't gain anything by putting down the tail, and do lose some
rudder effectiveness with the tail down.
Airplanes are airplanes, but they each have their own distinct personality.
When I first get a new airplane, I like to spend a while in experimentation
exploring the corners of its various envelopes. It can be a lot of fun
to see the different ways they respond to a little variation in technique.
John
Calin Brabandt
In article <4pkph7$n...@usenet.pa.dec.com>,
Really? The TD endorsment requires that you receive instruction in
them. Possibly your instructor overlooked this reg.
I've always felt that, with a wheel landing, the tail has to come down
sometime (accompanied with decreasing speed and sluggish controls), so
you may as well land it that way. However, wheel landings in gusty
crosswinds have the advantage of "spreading out the tasks" over a
longer period of time. You have the added control provided by
speed as you're concentrating on the touchdown. Once you've
"pinned the mains" with a little forward pressure, you can concentrate
on the task of maintaining directional control as you slow and lower
the tail. If you can do both things at once, you can do a three point
instead! Obviously wheel landings also provide better vision at the
time of touchdown, but it's going away as soon as you lower the
tail.
Cal
r.acker
Dennis <ange...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Where can I get more informatin about "3 point" vs "wheel"
>landings in the Vans RV4 ?
Try the RV mailing list.
Rob (RV-6Q).
James I. Lewis
In <4ppjp4$n...@news.jf.intel.com> cwbr...@ichips.intel.com (Calin
Brabandt) writes:
>
>In article <4pkph7$n...@usenet.pa.dec.com>,
>Bruce Lowe <lo...@giraf.zso.dec.com> wrote:
>>
>>-bcl (25 TD hr neophite, never learned wheel landings)
>
Really? The TD endorsment requires that you receive instruction in
>them. Possibly your instructor overlooked this reg.
I don't have any TD endorsement, my airplane and most of those in the
past are or still are tail wheel airplanes.
If you are not "grandfathered" to tailwheels I don't believe you need
an endorsement except to have passengers with you. ( for experimental
catagorie that is )
Just an opinion mindya.
Jim
John R. Johnson
On 13 Jun 1996, Calin Brabandt wrote:
SNIP for bandwidth reduction ...
>
> I've always felt that, with a wheel landing, the tail has to come down
> sometime (accompanied with decreasing speed and sluggish controls), so
> you may as well land it that way. However, wheel landings in gusty
> crosswinds have the advantage of "spreading out the tasks" over a
> longer period of time. You have the added control provided by
> speed as you're concentrating on the touchdown. Once you've
> "pinned the mains" with a little forward pressure, you can concentrate
> on the task of maintaining directional control as you slow and lower
> the tail. If you can do both things at once, you can do a three point
> instead! Obviously wheel landings also provide better vision at the
> time of touchdown, but it's going away as soon as you lower the
> tail.
>
becomes much less effective. Since the tailwheel swivels freely with no
lock, it doesn't provide any directional assist. This means that the
only directional modification at lower speeds comes from the brakes.
This suggests the advisability of wheel landing with directional control
provided by the flight controls until the speed decays enough to make
them less effective and then transitioning to the brakes for control.
This, of course, requires that the mains be solidly on the runway!
John
BFYM
In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960613093340.11801M-100000@reliant>, "John R.
Johnson" <jo...@siu.edu> writes:
>Airplanes are airplanes, but they each have their own distinct
personality.
>When I first get a new airplane, I like to spend a while in
experimentation
>exploring the corners of its various envelopes. It can be a lot of fun
>to see the different ways they respond to a little variation in
technique.
>
>John
It's amazing how distinctly different those personalities can be, from one
plane to the next. My Sonerai requires a completely opposite technique
than Johns' Stinson. The POH for my Sonerai recommends "hooking" the tail
wheel onto the ground slightly before the mains touch down, and keeping
the tail wheel planted throughout the landing roll. The tail wheel is
solidly connected to the rudder, so wherever the rudder points, so does
the tailwheel. The only thing it says in my POH, about wheel landings is,
"NEVER ATTEMPT THIS". I'm sure it's because of the relatively poor rudder
authority at slow airspeeds. From 0-55 MPH IAS, you have no (read that
"zero") rudder authority at all. From 55-70 it's marginal at best. From
70 to VNE, it goes from adequate to lots. The problem is, there's plenty
of elevator authority from 35 MPH IAS, to VNE. So you have a 20 MPH window
where you can keep the tail wheel off the runway, and have no directional
control. I've never had any problems landing the plane, but there have
been a couple of scary moments on takeoffs, while learning to keep the
tailwheel down until I see 55 indicated. :-) If you find yourself in that
20 MPH window, you're at the mercy of the wind, and whatever
irregularities there might be in the runway. If you do a wheel landing,
and then attemp to lower the tail wheel with the elevator before you get
below 50 MPH IAS, the airplane becomes airborne again, and you find
yourself wallowing around in ground effect. Again, with no directional
control. The one advantage to this setup is, it makes it easier to keep
the plane from doing a ground loop, when the tailwheel is on the deck.
BFYM.
John R. Johnson
On 17 Jun 1996, BFYM wrote:
<snip>
> tailwheel down until I see 55 indicated. :-) If you find yourself in that
> 20 MPH window, you're at the mercy of the wind, and whatever
> irregularities there might be in the runway. If you do a wheel landing,
> and then attemp to lower the tail wheel with the elevator before you get
> below 50 MPH IAS, the airplane becomes airborne again, and you find
> yourself wallowing around in ground effect. Again, with no directional
> control. The one advantage to this setup is, it makes it easier to keep
> the plane from doing a ground loop, when the tailwheel is on the deck.
>
> BFYM.
required over 90 mph to fly. Below 65mph there was NO rudder authority
at all. I lifted the tail once on takeoff and IMMEDIATELY headed of the
left side of the runway! I had to use right brake to get back on the
runway on takeoff. I hate to use brakes on the takeoff roll! The
only workable solution was to hold the tailwheel hard onto the runway
until you had at least 60 mph on the airspeed. Then you could lift the
tail without brakes to stay on the runway.
On landing you could wheel land it but you had to put the tail down
hard before you slowed below 70 mph. Since the stall speed was about 98
mph, you could do this without taking off again! :-{
Especially when you are dealing with small homebuilts, do not assume they
will behave just like your old familiar Cessna. Their "personality"
characteristics can be quite marked and require significant modifications
in your normal ground handling techniques.
John
Johnny
In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960613093340.11801M-100000@reliant>,
jo...@siu.edu says...
>
>On Wed, 12 Jun 1996, Larry Pardue wrote:
>
>> Well John, you give us your method of achieving a smooth wheel
landing,
>> but I had thought the issue was crosswind landings. I find my
airplane is
>> much better damped against side gusts with the tailwheel on the
ground
>> than it is with rudder and vertical stabilizer alone resisting the
side
>> pressure.
>
>I must admit I haven't flown a Pacer much in the last ten years.
However,
>I was racing a T-Storm to the end of the runway recently, and I did
wheel
>it on in a significant crosswind on pavement. I did a NO-NO and drove
it
>onto the runway at about 80 mph because I was really expediting. The
>T-Storm caught me before I could get it back to the hangar! :-)
>
>Most Pacer's have a pretty tight coupling between the rudder and the
>steerable tailwheel. If you have a good tailwheel, that couples well
>you can indeed gain a lot of stability by planting that tailwheen
firmly
>onto the runway. I tend to forget that, because the airplane I
usually
>fly has a "full swivel" tailwheel with NO coupling to the rudder and
no
>lock. I don't gain anything by putting down the tail, and do lose
some
>rudder effectiveness with the tail down.
>
personality.
>When I first get a new airplane, I like to spend a while in
experimentation
>exploring the corners of its various envelopes. It can be a lot of
fun
>to see the different ways they respond to a little variation in
technique.
So tell me, with all of your vast tailwheel experience (I am serious
here) how would you approach the following type?;
A tailwheel conversion ship that is short coupled, has insufficient
rudder to keep itself straight on the runway with the tail up at full
power, but has a wide main gear track and good Cleveland brakes in it's
favor. Oh, did I mention that it is fairly tail heavy... say 100 lbs on
the tail of a 1500 lb airplane when it is in level attitude? Would you
keep the tail down till it flys on takeoff? On landing would you make
sure there is a full stall as all 3 wheels touched down and avoid wheel
landings? I am anticipating characteristics similar to a blind squirrel
when I make my first flights here in a few weeks. Don't get me wrong,
the bulk of my total time is in this same airplane, but that's when it
had a free castoring nose wheel, not a coupled tailwheel. Oh, and it's
got 50% more power now than it used to. Suggestions anyone? I figure it
will be something like a cross between a Baby Lakes and an RV6 on
landing. Anyone with lots of tailwheel time care to come along for the
ride on those first few trips into the air and back? All of my
tailwheel time (hardly any) is like Cub and Citabria... no help I'm
sure.
--
-j-
______________________________________________
**********************************************
** **
** Johnny Enterprises **
** http://www.everett.net/users/allnight/ **
** **
**********************************************
John R. Johnson
On 18 Jun 1996, Johnny wrote:
<snip>
OK, Johnny, for what it is worth, here are my suggestions.
>
> So tell me, with all of your vast tailwheel experience (I am serious
> here) how would you approach the following type?;
> A tailwheel conversion ship that is short coupled, has insufficient
> rudder to keep itself straight on the runway with the tail up at full
> power, but has a wide main gear track and good Cleveland brakes in it's
> favor. Oh, did I mention that it is fairly tail heavy... say 100 lbs on
The tail heavy will help you plant the tailwheel firmly.
Lots of taildraggers will swerve off the runway if you bring the tail up
as soon as you can. The famous Globe Swift was nortorious for this.
There must be some speed where there IS enough rudder authority. If there
is not I would suggest the Stinson 108-3 modification where they about
doubled the vertical area at the back of the airplane! Here is how I
would check it out.
Make taxi runs down a long runway. Increase the speed by about 10 mph
each run. Attempt to lift the tail while you are accellerating to the
speed with full power and check for swerve. At the first sign of swerve
cut power and let the tail back down. You should NOT fly yet.
Short coupled with wide gear and good brakes ( Clevelands ) can get you
into a bale of trouble. With my Stits, I avoided brakes on roll out,
because, unless I was perfectly even in brake application, they introduced
a swerve that the rudder couldn't cope with! That will likely be the case
with this machine also. On the other hand, the brakes will like be quite
effective in STOPPING a swerve as well. Care is clearly indicated, though.
When you are taxiing at the speed you should fly at, with the tail high,
come to a stop again. When you can accellerate and stop without a problem,
you are getting close to flying.
The next step is a quick rigging check. Accellerate to flight speed and
rotate. Immediately cut the power and land. Try to stay in ground effect.
Did it drop a wing suddenly when you lifted off? If it did, go back and
carefully recheck your rigging. Something is crooked. If it didn't, you
are ready to fly.
Get loose in your seat and keep your tongue straight in your mouth.
Accellerate to flying speed and pull it off. Keep you speed well above
stall but don't let it increase unduly either. Remember, you haven't done
any flutter testing yet!
I like to go on up to altitude, checking oil pressure and all temps in a
continuous fashion while remaining where I can easily reach the runway
power off, and try a simple power off stall. How and when does it break.
Add your cushion to that stall speed, ( more than 30%, you want 30% more
than calibrated, and most pitot tubes are up so much at stall that they
read horribly low. ) Now you have SOME idea of an approach speed. Try
flying at that approach speed at altitude and see how the controls feel.
If you have flaps, don't use them yet.
Now come back and land. The landing should be pretty anticlimactic. You
already did the exact same thing in your last fast taxi run. You can
wheel it on gently, but be sure you have the tail down and planted before
you get down to the highest speed where it gave you a swerve. That should
ensure positive directional control on the rollout. Once you get to where
you can get it up and down safely and consistently, then you can start
trying stalls with flaps, from turns, and so on.
I would recommend you get in touch with an EAA Flight Advisor. I am one,
for Southern Illinois, Eastern Missouri, and Western Kentucky and Tennesee.
I don't know where you are located. You can call EAA Headquarters and get
a list of Flight Advisors in your area with taildragger qualifications.
> the tail of a 1500 lb airplane when it is in level attitude? Would you
> keep the tail down till it flys on takeoff? On landing would you make
> sure there is a full stall as all 3 wheels touched down and avoid wheel
> landings? I am anticipating characteristics similar to a blind squirrel
> when I make my first flights here in a few weeks. Don't get me wrong,
> the bulk of my total time is in this same airplane, but that's when it
> had a free castoring nose wheel, not a coupled tailwheel. Oh, and it's
> got 50% more power now than it used to. Suggestions anyone? I figure it
> will be something like a cross between a Baby Lakes and an RV6 on
> landing. Anyone with lots of tailwheel time care to come along for the
> ride on those first few trips into the air and back? All of my
> tailwheel time (hardly any) is like Cub and Citabria... no help I'm
> sure.
That may not be a bad idea. If you know a fellow with lots of taildragger
time. A Pitt's pilot deals with that kind of ground handling all the time.
Of course, you don't want to be like the fellow with the GB Replica. He
had Delmar Benjamin fly it, and Delmar said it was docile. He put it on
its back the first time he flew it. Even a docile taildragger will turn
around and BITE you if you stop flying when it is on the ground. I was
checking out a CFI in taildraggers one time in a tandem/stick 65 HP SLOW
DOCILE taildragger. He made a PERFECT approach and touchdown. He was so
proud he turned around to look at me on rollout with an ear to ear grin.
He was amazed to see a horrified look on my face as I was frantically
stomping on the opposite rudder and brake to avoid immediate contact with
the tules! When he turned around he floored the right rudder!
John
Johnny
In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960619111752.14707M-100000@reliant>,
jo...@siu.edu says...
>The tail heavy will help you plant the tailwheel firmly.
>Lots of taildraggers will swerve off the runway if you bring the tail
up
>as soon as you can. The famous Globe Swift was nortorious for this.
>There must be some speed where there IS enough rudder authority. If
there
>is not I would suggest the Stinson 108-3 modification where they about
>doubled the vertical area at the back of the airplane! Here is how I
>would check it out.
This airplane needs to be going about 40mph before it has any real
rudder authority. Even as a tricycle with a free castoring nose wheel,
you needed to drag the right brake some when you first poured in the
power. That was with 108hp, now it has 160+. It starts to fly at about
70mph.
>Make taxi runs down a long runway. Increase the speed by about 10 mph
>each run. Attempt to lift the tail while you are accellerating to the
>speed with full power and check for swerve. At the first sign of
swerve
>cut power and let the tail back down. You should NOT fly yet.
I am based at an 1800' field. I can drive around a little, but there
just isn't that much room for serious high speed taxiing. I was
planning on driving around a little and then getting off and over to
Arlington where I have a little more room to play, but I think I would
like to bring a little insurance with me for that first landing.
>The next step is a quick rigging check. Accellerate to flight speed
and
>rotate. Immediately cut the power and land. Try to stay in ground
effect.
>Did it drop a wing suddenly when you lifted off? If it did, go back
and
>carefully recheck your rigging. Something is crooked. If it didn't,
you
>are ready to fly.
I am using the same rigging templates I used before... used to break
pretty straight, but still good advise.
>How and when does it break.
>Add your cushion to that stall speed, ( more than 30%, you want 30%
more
>than calibrated, and most pitot tubes are up so much at stall that
they
>read horribly low. ) Now you have SOME idea of an approach speed.
Now here is where it gets a little tricky, and why I was asking you
taildragger vets about it. The thing stalls at about 69mph, approach is
usually about 85mph, 75mph over the fence, touchdown at about 70mph. If
you come in any hotter, you will float forever. If any slower, well,
you are in for a hard landing. Remember, this is a certified ship
(still, barely), the flight charactoristics are very well known. I have
most of my total time in this particular airplane. I know the airplane
VERY well. Before I completely restored it, put in the bigger engine,
and made it a taildragger, I wore that baby. I have flown other
heavily modified American Yankee's, even in one that was a
taildragger (liked it so much I made mine that way) but I wasn't doing
the landings in that one. Mine is only the 3rd true Yankee that has
been converted. If I had a little Pitts time, I wouldn't think too much
of just climbing in and taking off, because I am (was) very comfortable
with this aircraft before I took the training wheel off the front. It's
just the lack of tailwheel time that is making me think I would be
wiser to get some help (something I usually don't consider), and given
the speeds involved and the fact that it has bouce-a-matic solid
aluminum slab type gear legs, I don't think that my Cub time, or any
amount of Cub time is going to help me on this one.
I guess maybe if I can't find someone to hold my hand the first couple
times I will go get a little dual Pitts time.
So, who out here in the Pacific Northwest has a 2 place Pitts they
would like to demonstrate?
And John, thanks for the words of advice... too bad you aren't out in
this neck of the woods.
Rod Farlee
Johnny wrote:
> This airplane needs to be going about 40mph before it has any real
> rudder authority. Even as a tricycle with a free castoring nose wheel,
> you needed to drag the right brake some when you first poured in the
> power. That was with 108hp, now it has 160+. It starts to fly at about
> 70mph.
I'm sure this is obvious, but there's no rule that one must use full
power for takeoff. And there's no rule that one can't flare by adding
a little power and it into the touchdown, just to have some propwash
to improve rudder authority.
I realize that, from an 1800' field, you don't have a lot of runway
to waste. But perhaps the initial taxi and flight tests might be better
done somewhere else?
Best wishes - rod farlee
John R. Johnson
On 20 Jun 1996, Johnny wrote:
<snip>
>
> rudder authority. Even as a tricycle with a free castoring nose wheel,
> you needed to drag the right brake some when you first poured in the
> power. That was with 108hp, now it has 160+. It starts to fly at about
> 70mph.
OK, That is not bad. About like the Swift. Hold the tail down firmly
with back stick until you see 55 to 60 mph. Then ease the tail up.
When you pass 70 mph, start easing back and you are in the air. All of
this should use us about 400 feet of your runway.
>
> I am based at an 1800' field. I can drive around a little, but there
> just isn't that much room for serious high speed taxiing. I was
> planning on driving around a little and then getting off and over to
> Arlington where I have a little more room to play, but I think I would
> like to bring a little insurance with me for that first landing.
It might pay to truck it over to a longer runway! Then again, there
probably won't be any problem.
>
>
> I am using the same rigging templates I used before... used to break
> pretty straight, but still good advise.
>
> Now here is where it gets a little tricky, and why I was asking you
> taildragger vets about it. The thing stalls at about 69mph, approach is
> usually about 85mph, 75mph over the fence, touchdown at about 70mph. If
> you come in any hotter, you will float forever. If any slower, well,
Yes, that is typical Yankee behavior. I would fly my approach about
85 - 90 mph. Over the fence at 80 mph. Let it settle gently onto the
runway at about 75 to 80. Use feel and look outside, don't worry about
the gauges. Fly it down to the runway and fly it on. Then hit the
brakes as evenly as possible, set the tail down as you slow through
60 mph. and hold it down with full back stick as you slow.
> you are in for a hard landing. Remember, this is a certified ship
> (still, barely), the flight charactoristics are very well known. I have
> most of my total time in this particular airplane. I know the airplane
> VERY well. Before I completely restored it, put in the bigger engine,
> and made it a taildragger, I wore that baby. I have flown other
> heavily modified American Yankee's, even in one that was a
> taildragger (liked it so much I made mine that way) but I wasn't doing
> the landings in that one. Mine is only the 3rd true Yankee that has
> been converted. If I had a little Pitts time, I wouldn't think too much
> of just climbing in and taking off, because I am (was) very comfortable
> with this aircraft before I took the training wheel off the front. It's
> just the lack of tailwheel time that is making me think I would be
> wiser to get some help (something I usually don't consider), and given
> the speeds involved and the fact that it has bouce-a-matic solid
> aluminum slab type gear legs, I don't think that my Cub time, or any
> amount of Cub time is going to help me on this one.
>
> I guess maybe if I can't find someone to hold my hand the first couple
> times I will go get a little dual Pitts time.
Do by all means get a little dual. An RV-6 taildragger model would be
ideal. It should have pretty similiar handling characteristics to the
taildragger Yankee, and it has enough power to be realistic there also.
You might try Van's.
It is too bad I am not out in that neck of the woods. It sounds like
just plain fun to me!
John
DThomas520
I have about 200 hrs and over 500 landings in my 4 and have landed it in
25 knot crosswinds. I personally prefer the 3 pt. Touch down speed is
lower, control authority is is good, don't have to worry about losing
control during that critical time when the tail is settling to the ground
and losing effectiveness( that's why it is settling to the ground I
guess). Don't get me wrong, wheel landings are fun and good practice, but
not necessary in my 4.
Johnny
In article <31C9BE...@sadtler.com>, r...@sadtler.com says...
>I'm sure this is obvious, but there's no rule that one must use full
>power for takeoff.
With the little engine I had to really give it all it had to make sure
I had a little margin at the other end. I suppose I won't have to flail
quite as hard now with the major increase in power.
>And there's no rule that one can't flare by adding
>a little power and it into the touchdown, just to have some propwash
>to improve rudder authority.
>I realize that, from an 1800' field, you don't have a lot of runway
>to waste. But perhaps the initial taxi and flight tests might be
better
>done somewhere else?
Probably, but I have found another solution. I forgot all about an old
instructor buddy of mine that has a good amount of Yankee time, as well
as tons of Pitts time, not to mention just about every rating you can
think of. I forgot all about him, and the fact that he owned a Pitts
for years and flew it frequently. When I ran into him today, the bell
finally rang and after I explained what I wanted to do he said, "well,
as long as we get to go to a good resturant this time..."
now if I could just talk him out of a little time in that Brantley of
his...
John R. Johnson
Sounds like an ideal solution Johnny. Then you can get him to give
you a checkout in it also!
John
On 22 Jun 1996, Johnny wrote:
> In article <31C9BE...@sadtler.com>, r...@sadtler.com says...
>
> >I'm sure this is obvious, but there's no rule that one must use full
> >power for takeoff.
>
> With the little engine I had to really give it all it had to make sure
> I had a little margin at the other end. I suppose I won't have to flail
> quite as hard now with the major increase in power.
>
> >And there's no rule that one can't flare by adding
> >a little power and it into the touchdown, just to have some propwash
> >to improve rudder authority.
> >I realize that, from an 1800' field, you don't have a lot of runway
> >to waste. But perhaps the initial taxi and flight tests might be
> better
> >done somewhere else?
>
> Probably, but I have found another solution. I forgot all about an old
> instructor buddy of mine that has a good amount of Yankee time, as well
> as tons of Pitts time, not to mention just about every rating you can
> think of. I forgot all about him, and the fact that he owned a Pitts
> for years and flew it frequently. When I ran into him today, the bell
> finally rang and after I explained what I wanted to do he said, "well,
> as long as we get to go to a good resturant this time..."
>
> now if I could just talk him out of a little time in that Brantley of
> his...
>
dlhob...@gmail.com
> Where can I get more informatin about "3 point" vs "wheel"
> landings in the Vans RV4 ?
> landings for high crosswind, but then many articles in Plane&Pilot
> say many taildraggers are fully controlable down to full stall 3 point
> landings and wheel landings may never be needed.. my RV4 seems to be one
> of those (so far ..) I sure would like more input as I only have about
> 50 hrs in taildraggers... all RV4 stories and opinions would be welcome.
> Thanks.. DA in GA
Barnyard BOb
Does he have a name? :)
It's been decades since I was an active flight instructor, but I have
many, many 1000's of hours taiwheel... and over 1000 hours in my RV3.
A lot of local RV pilots do nothing but wheel landings saying their
RV-x is safer to wheel land. THAT IS PURE BULLSHIT.
When I quit flight instructing, the FAA was saying...
the slowest landing speed was the safest landing speed.
That means 3 point and FULL flaps... NORMALLY.
If conditions warrant, less than full flaps may be appropriate.
The ony reason NOT to land 3 point in crosswind is when there is
INSUFFICIENT rudder to do so. That might mean 20 mph direct crosswind
in an RV4. Been a while since I flew RV4's.
Barnyard Bob - 61years of licensed powered flight- less in sailplanes