It is down to the training organisation to determine aircraft suitability for the training course and examiner to accept for the test. Lack of toe brakes is not a no go – many of the early PA28s have no toe brakes and operate on the pull parking brake which can be reached by FI/Examiner and I have tested on many times. It will depend on the actual aircraft configuration and training desired – I wouldn’t rule out testing an IRR for an experienced pilot on type for example.
The issue with tailwheel airplanes is that using the brakes hard when that ditch looms ahead is almost as likely to result in an accident as not using them.
I agree entirely. The time to brake hard is at the beginning of the landing roll when it is impossible to pitch over, not at the end. So if we’re going to need brakes for deceleration (rather than just for directional control), we apply them prior to touchdown and ease them off to control the pitch.
There are many aircraft that are flown without breaks, TB10 is probably not one of them 
I do not see the issue of having none for FI training a PPL owner in his aircraft but it will be an issue for exams
For initial PPL training guaranteed it will be a disaster
For IR(R) it should be ok-ish, one is expected to land in 2km runways? not their 400m home base?
As rule of thumb, if you think you will need too much breaks for takeoff/landing (or too much of them against/power when taxi) one day it will blow up on the face even when they are working…
Thanks all. I’ll head to over ‘Maintenance’ for “how much to retrofit P2 toes brakes on a TB10”
@Silvaire you are correct, I also have given instruction without brakes on tailwheel vintage aircraft. Generally on an old Piper ragwing the brakes operate by appointment in any case.
Standard final check is ensuring the pilot receiving dual has his heels or toes off the brakes.
BTW the ground handling accident I referred to was in a piston nose wheel twin – quite an expensive and careless incident.
The issue with tailwheel airplanes is that using the brakes hard when that ditch looms ahead is almost as likely to result in an accident as not using them. The lesson is often not to use the brakes, meaning initiating a harmless low speed ground loop versus a nose over. We did some of that before I ever took off in my own plane. It was valuable stuff, and I’m afraid when people start talking about aircraft ground handling, instructor side brakes etc as though it were a discussion on Joe’s Driving School, my eyes glaze over.
I used to know an FI who ended up in a ditch doing this. Various problems followed…
I learned how to fly in a Luscombe with pilot only heel brakes. Notwithstanding any regulatory issue what we did was a lot of taxiing and ground maneuvering prior to anything else. It was manageable, especially given that my cost for operating the plane was very little.
boscomantico wrote:
I think this is regulated on a CAA level.The German LBA has rules on what they consider an aircraft fufilling the conditions of a training aircraft. Ask „your“ CAA.
Indeed… The reason I ask here is someone may have been in the same position in the UK. Not sure how quickly the LBA respond to ‘non-standard’ questions, but in the UK it is likely to be a month and we’d like to/need to make the decision a little faster than this.
I know of one case where an instructor did not have brakes and the aircraft chewed up a van.
I think you are answering your own question:)
