when the taildragger touches the ground with main wheels first, the tail lowers a bit (depending on your lift and vertical speed at touchdown)
I have found success doing it differently. Main wheels touch, stick goes smoothly forward as much as appropriate, fully if possible at that speed. AoA is immediately reduced, and the plane stays.
Or..... you three points at a full stall, and there is no fly left in it.
But, three pointing in the Teal works poorly, so I wheel land. Even if I have touched down nearly three point, 'cause I was flying a little slowly, I still lift the tail, and it works out well.
Or..... you three points at a full stall, and there is no fly left in it.
Every time I do that they call it "tailstrike" and perform some very expensive maintenace. Luckily I didn't learn to fly taildraggers otherwise it would happen more often ;-)
I have found success doing it differently. Main wheels touch, stick goes smoothly forward as much as appropriate, fully if possible at that speed. AoA is immediately reduced, and the plane stays.
What would be a perfect wheel landing. But in your Teal, I guess you don't have to worry too much about nosing her over, do you? At least sealing the hull should be less expensive than a prop strike inspection / overhaul.
I found wheel landings very handy for Rallye flying / spot landings, since you can put her down with almost any speed where you want.
I guess you don't have to worry too much about nosing her over, do you?
Haha, yeah...
You can gently put it up on it's nose, though you gotta be careful letting it back down, or you bend tailwheel springs.
>
It was easier to do some touch up spray painting that way!
However, while I was test flying this, it was always three point. I might be able to afford to pay to repair a tailwheel, but I could never afford that prop or engine!
It looks like this on takeoff, if you're not quick to lift the tail as you roll. They tell me I did this a couple of times, but I was not trying to!
As per the VFR limits thread, a taildragger may be more conducive to playing the precautionary landing card. Now if we can work on the moose stall syndrome which afflicts working taildraggers...
Well, I've just come across this and don't wish to plough through several pages of posts. I'll just say:
1) Flying tailwheel aeroplanes is much more fun. Apart from the extra fun of that gear configuration in itself, tail wheels tend to be fitted to aeroplanes with spirited handling and a stick. Those with soggy handling and a steering wheel have tri-gear.
2) Tailwheel aircraft demand to be landed correctly; unlike tri-gears they will not tolerate sloppy technique. This will increase the skill level of those who require such improvement, which is a good thing.
3) There is NO good looking tri-gear light aircraft. Only tail wheel light aeroplanes look 'right'. All the good looking tri-gears are heavy types, not light aircraft.
Those with soggy handling and a steering wheel have tri-gear.
Sure! Apart from some exceptions:
This will increase the skill level of those who require such improvement, which is a good thing.
Sure. More Me109 and Fw190 have been lost in landing accidents than shot down. Certainly a good thing, otherwise we would all speak german now ;-)
Only tail wheel light aeroplanes look 'right'.
Sure!
I still think this looks like a plane with training floats so you can't catch a wingtip (even when inverted!).
real men fly taildraggers (at least from time to time)..I am just surprised it was not mentioned here before ;-)...just kidding. But there is something on that. As mentioned before taildragger will learn you how to land properly, not just change from flight mode into taxi mode. But beware, there are different types of taildraggers - even they are looking quite the same. Take Zlin Z-126 and Zlin-226MS. Behind the firewall the airframe is not too much different (Z-226 a bit lighter despite common trend in aircraft models evolution and it´s flown from the rear seat), the same wing, the same tail. 226 has 180 HP engine, 126 105 HP. So something like 80 lbs of weight difference before firewall. To land 126 without hopping for the rest of runway and beyond you really need to make three point landing (and I do not mean left wheel, left wingtip and propeller as those three point) while 226 will make just a single hop even you were not so precise about landing. No problem to make wheel landing on 226, but I never tried it on 126 - I had a feeling she is not going to like it.....
Airliners for the past 60 years have been nosewheel there,s a good reason for that.
I was flying the 172 down to Reno for a show where a certain very famous non DC-3 vintage tailwheel airliner was booked to appear. Landing in for fuel in Madras, Oregon, I noticed said airliner taxying out.
Gesturing to the now departing unique star attraction, the refuelling guy said "Wow they sure went hunting for rabbits with that one", claiming it had ground looped off the runway and into the brush on arrival, very fortunately without damage.
I doubt the chap up front was a low time PPL!
