It is because the nose wheel of the DA20 is not steered directly with the feet
Yes, the DA40 is the same. But with a bit of propwash the rudder works fine at anything above a walking pace.
To clarify the PA28 is no fire breathing warbird on the ground and is very easy to land and maintain directional control. The minor design flaws become apparent: when landing in a crosswind and driving it on in a crab, the nose wheel design has less positive stability as it it aligned with the rudder direction; the bar above the pedals can be pressed resulting in the rudder pedals not being used for steering!
These features are well known and discussed in safety reviews of the type, and should be familiar to most instructors on the type, but sometimes are not.
I admit to not having flown the DA20, so cannot comment on that one. But other “no nosewheel steering” types I have flown (Lake amphibian/Grumman Tiger/Cessna180/182/185/208 amphibian), though requiring some brake for taxiing, will respond with rudder only use as long as there is some power, and, aside from straightening out with power application at the start of the takeoff roll, do not require the use of brakes for directional control at runway speeds. I have never had a problem keeping a PA28 going the desired direction.
johnh wrote:
Interesting, because the opposite is true in the DA40
It is because the nose wheel of the DA20 is not steered directly with the feet, it is not linked. There are only springs that you can load with a force with the pedals and wait whether the nose wheel will turn. Using the brakes it works out, but I never got used to this.
You have to use the brakes to keep this bird on runway heading.
Interesting, because the opposite is true in the DA40. The rudder works well at open taxiway speeds, say 10-15 knots. It’s only at really low speeds, when manouvering on the ramp or on narrow taxiways, that you need to use the brakes.
I don’t recall a slightest issue in controlling a PA28 on ground, even when landing and taxi in +35kts crosswinds with idle power
Obviously, on full power go-around or takeoff with stick full back lot of things can go wrong when it comes to the resulting flight path when the aircraft end up “stuck” 2ft above ground
They usually stop when they hit something 1km away on those “outgoing only takeoff” rather than the pilot pulls mixture and take his loss…I remember a similar accident while ago, where AAIB found it was loss of control during takeoff attempt on one mag on hot day, it’s unlikely the case here on go-around? maybe they pulled the stick against full flaps on PA28-140?
Pilot_DAR wrote:
Unless you’re substantially wheelbarrowing a tricycle plane, the nosewheel steering is doing little to steer compared to the rudder, at any speeds faster than taxi speed.
Referring to tricycle gear in general, I disagree. Try to do this in a DA20 Katana and you will end up in the roses and bushes at the side of the airfield. I never got warm with the take-off ground roll in a Katana. By the way, the rudder has negligible effect. You have to use the brakes to keep this bird on runway heading.
RobertL18C wrote:
it does have a higher cluster of runway departure, ground loss of control accidents.
Unless you’re substantially wheelbarrowing a tricycle plane, the nosewheel steering is doing little to steer compared to the rudder, at any speeds faster than taxi speed. If you’re using the pedals, it’s going to go where you steer it to, regardless of what the nosewheel is doing. This can be demonstrated in a 172 by putting two heavy people in the back seat (don’t worry, you’re not going flying!). Set 15 degrees of flaps, apply full nose up elevator and open the throttle with caution. As the plane begins to move forward, the nose will rise, (so you know the nosewheel has locked forward) and it may even come off the ground. Don’t bang the tail, but you can taxi it around that way, and steer quite well.
I don’t accept an argument that it “wouldn’t steer”, blaming the third wheel, at speeds faster than taxi speed. Use the rudder as needed!
The nosewheel shouldn’t matter until touchdown. I was safety pilot in our Jodel DR1050 when the pilot suddenly firewalled the throttle after a perfect crosswind landing, intended as a full stop, near the left, upwind, edge of the runway, with 1,000+m left. The aircraft was at 45 degrees to the runway, with the right wing in the air when I took control. I tried to lift off, but the grass was too rough, and stopped with no damage.
The Cherokee design has a couple of potential flaws on the steering. Unlike Cessna the nose wheel doesn’t align with the relative air flow when airborne. It also has a bar above the pedals which can interfere with the steering especially in a moment of panic. As a consequence, while a very safe design, arguably with one of the best safety records in GA, it does have a higher cluster of runway departure, ground loss of control accidents.
As this was a dual it would be interesting to understand whether this was a botched go around, or obvious confusion in the cockpit? The instructor could have pulled the mixture as soon as it was obvious there was a departure occurring, at the very least to prevent a potential fire.
