Thanks for the many informative inputs on the thread. I hope others will give their experiences, especially screw ups and brain hick-ups so the rest of us, especially new pilots, can learn even at the risk of being beat up a little by follow posters. Maybe a thread where you are not identified."Any body ever take off on one mag" The "Real" Bush Whacker...Garv

I've given up on any form of humility long ago, every time the prop turns anew, I learn.
That having been said, I have tried to fly in every (safe) condition I can including gusty and cross wind situations. I have on occasion grabbed a CFI friend of mine for a second opinion and fresh perspective. There is no "pat" answer on any of this. Every time a variable changes, so does the action required for your aircraft. The only constant with a TW is "NO DRIFT! I wish that included with initial PP instruction would be a certain amount of time with a TW aircraft. Just like the four or five hours of hood time, so too should there be some exposure to TW priniciples. Knowing what I do now (Damn little it seems!) I wish I had learned in a TW.
My nephew called me from WA on Sunday, unbeknownst to me, he had started flight lessons. He said that he had missed flying with me and figured he was going to pursuit on his own. His opening line on the call was "I just landed a 172!" I heard a tone of excitement voice I had not thought of in a long time. I remember that feeling. Now to get him some tail time.
Pretty cool.

Kurt, where's the nephew located? Most places, it's pretty hard to find a t/w airplane available for training, AND a qualified instructor too. Harveys has a Champ, I believe there are Cubs at Paine Field, Olympia and Vashon Island. Don't know anything about the instructor(s) at each place except for George Kirkish at Vashon, you probably know him.

Eric

Nephew's flying out APEX for the time being. He wanted to start at a small field. I'd really like to have him fly with Mort But George is a good instructor too. Summer would be a great choice too if she's around.
Last year Mort was tooling around in that perfect Fairchild. Mohair, roll down windows and a Super Scarab rumbling away up front. He offered & I never got a chance for whatever reason. Really regret that though
That little non-electric Aeronca the Museum has would be good too.

Differential braking to control the airplane is something I use all the time when wheel landing. I don't remember when it became part of my technique but it is one of the most useful tools I have. I don't have a steerable tailwheel and the rudder is only so useful. I don't want someone to go out and wreck their airplane but just wanted to add what really works for me in the off-airport environment for me. I actually will land with the brakes on a little most the time and from touch down until the airplane is stopped, one brake or the other is probably on. I think many fear using the brakes, sometimes that is the only thing that will salvage an airplane that is all out of sorts.

I remember looking at my flight instructor one time when I was first learning (probably around 5 hours of tailwheel time and I needed 15 for insurance) with big eyes saying HELP. He grabbed the controls and a few quick footed reactions with rudder and brakes and we were going straight. Man was I glad he was there! I would have ground looped by myself I am sure. He was a great instructor and would let me get the airplane so crossed up and allow me to recover. When it was plain to see I was not able to recover, he would step in. I was amazed at just how screwed up I could get it and still have him fix it with a few quick footed inputs. There is always the big eraser turning out front but sometimes you have to get it down.

One time right after I got my tailwheel sign off in the M5-235c I was practicing crosswind landings. It was going ok until the front that was moving through was bringing wind and rain that became almost too much for this new tailwheel pilot. I tried 4 or 5 times to get it on the ground at Troutdale and every time my tail would start to drop I would start to lose control. I was in over my head but there was no one in the right seat to help. Luckily the runway at Troutdale is almost wide enough to land. I used from one side to the other and probably 600-800 ft getting stopped. When it was all over the guy in the tower said that looked fun and I said NOT! He said his knuckles where white for me. By then the weather was directly over Troutdale and I was heading for the hangar. I got more crosswind instruction after that because I knew I was not doing something right.

Greg

I just went back and read a MTV post and realize the brakes have become a crutch "Oh Crap"

Just because you have a "crutch" doesn't mean you always have to use it. I use brakes all the time wheel landing, it's just another control imput like rudder or aileron.... you just have to remember to use no more than necesary..sometimes you do need all there is, usually not. Kinda like forward stick taking off (or landing)... just use as required.
Greg, just watched Big Rocks V2, pretty cool. I especially enjoyed the "field repair" feature, but have to admit that I wouldn't have the cajones to fly that thing out in that "repaired" condition. I got a kick out of the electronically concealed tail number. Good show!

Eric

mtv wrote:As to wheel landings being looked down on in the 40's--I thought it was the other way around. Ever see a P-51, P-40, P-47, C-46, C-47, Grumman G-21, etc three point land?? Probably won't either. Those were all 40's airplanes, and you won't find anyone who flies any of them that regularly does three points.

The reason for that, though is that none of those airplanes had STEERABLE tailwheels. If the tailwheel doesn't steer, there really isn't any reason to get in a hurry to put it on the ground, is there?
MTV

P-51s (and other WW-II fighters) were regularly 3-pointed back in the
40's & 50's+, but I agree you don't see many owners doing that these
days.

At the time, Naval fighters were typically operated out of huge fields (as
opposed to runways) and the Naval training syllabus taught 3-point
landings, and nothing else (this was for the SNJ).

The P-51 does have a steerable tailwheel. Any stick position aft of full
forward "locks" the tailwheel and allows steering while taxiing with rudder
input. Full forward stick unlocks the tailwheel and allows it to castor. The
P-40 has a castoring tailwheel. Don't know about the P-47 or the other
aircraft mentioned....

In any event, my opinion is that one should be able to 3-point or
wheel-land whatever taildragger one is flying (pilot's call...). In other
words, you put the controls wherever they need to go so the airplane
does what you want it to do! (never let it do whatever it wants
to do!).

Bela,

I believe that the Mustang's tailwheel LOCKS, but does NOT steer with the stick all the way back. Once locked it has a few degrees of side to sid e motion in the lock. I could be wrong, but I don't think so. Most of those big tailwheel airplanes like the C-46 have locking tailwheels.

The Navy teaches carrier style landings from the git go, because that's the only way you can get aboard the boat. Doesn't have anything to do with the configuration of the airplane, or whether it would be easier to wheel or three point.

Same thing with AAC pilots in WWII--train them fast, was the mantra. Those guys were into P-51's at a couple hundred hours.

Also, airplanes were expendable. We had lots of them, and lots got used up.

It's really interesting to visit with an ex Luftwaffe fighter pilot about the landing characteristics of THEIR airplanes. I knew one of these guys, who got to fly a Spitfire and a Mustang after the war. He marveled at how easy they were to land compared to his Messerschmidt. I've heard somewhere that something like 60 to 70 % of the German fighters were lost in ground accidents during the war, not combat.

Greg,

Forgive my comment about a crutch. The context I was using that in was that if new tailwheel pilots start to use brakes exclusively, they are giving up their primary steering tool.

I too use brakes as appropriate. I see no point in wearing them out prematurely, though.

Also, a piece of advice from a VERY experienced old time flight instructor:

"Son, there is one thing that NO flight instructor can fix in a tailwheel airplane, and that is a set of student pilot size 14's hard on the brakes."

That has been my experience as well.

For most people, and where they land, tailwheel steering will do 90 % of the steering chores easily. Brakes are there to bat clean up, for most of us.

MTV

Got to thinking a bit more on this. I think everyone needs to go back and re-read the title of the post: HIGH SPEED differential braking.

My point is simply that at high speed, you should have totally adequate control authority from rudder and ailerons to handle the airplane without the necessity of using brakes MOST of the time. There may be situations where a quick stab on the brake will help get things sorted out.

But, most pilots of these things don't get into trouble at high speed. The vast majority of loss of control accidents in tailwheel aircraft happen at relatively slow speeds, as described by Greg, where the tail is transitioning to the ground. At that point, you don't have much EXCEPT brakes to help you steer until you get the tailwheel on the ground.

The reason the vast majority of WWII airplanes had locking tailwheels is so you wouldn't HAVE to use brakes in the latter part of the landing roll, after the tail comes down.

Don't forget also that, by deflecting the downwind aileron downward during the latter part of the landing roll, we aren't trying to "roll" the airplane. What we are doing is using the deflection of that aileron to generate some lift on that wing tip. LIft creates induced drag, and that little bit of additional drag waaaaayyyy out there on that wingtip will do a LOT to keep the airplane from weathervaning.

The vast majority of people I transition to tailwheels center the controls at the touchdown, then just sit there, even in a crosswind. Those ailerons provide a lot of assistance, even on the ground at 10 mph, folks.

I certainly don't mean to suggest that use of brakes is inappropriate during landing.

My point was, GENERALLY there are better tools to steer with at HIGH speed, as originally described in this post.



MTV

I agree with everything you say (you shouldn't need brakes unless
you've gomered the landing somehow!).

Sorry to nit-pick, but the P-51 tailwheel is steerable. Cables that
control the rudder go to an intermediary bellcrank which has another
set of cables connected to a steering arm on the tailwheel post.

I forget what the specification is, but the tailwheel is steerable to
something like 6 degrees either side of center before it hits a
stop.

I have the same design/mod on my SNJ-5. All SNJs originally had
just a lever-operated locking tailwheel, but many have been
retrofitted / upgraded with what the T-6/SNJ/Harvard crowd
refers to as the "P-51 Tailwheel mod" (the tailwheel de-clutching
head and steering arm + related linkage has the same North American
part numbers as the P-51).

Me too.

MTV

I just finished reading F.E Potts' "Guide to Bush Flying" page 138

"However, out in the bush on short, rough strips, this is rarely possible, and a slightly different technique is called for:

With this technique the pilot makes a normal approach, with a couple of extra knots of airspeed added to deal with the gusts. Then, coming over the threshold with full flaps, he reaches down and releases the flap lever so the flaps go to zero. This is done just at the flare, and when the timing is right the airplane drops onto the ground nicely in the "three point" attitude. Then, if the strip is smooth and hard and long enough, the pilot brings the airplane up to the wheel-landing position and applies brakes."

The last line above amazed me. As they say "do what ever it takes"...Garv

N6EA wrote:The best argument against diff. braking

Mark

I am absolutely certain a friend of mine totaled his pristine Cessna 120 because of his use of brakes on take off.
I do not know why or for how long or he did this but on the occasion I rode with him in his newly purchased Cessna 170, we are rolling out on take off and I feel the yank here... yank there... back and forth sensation and I look down to the rudder pedals to see him steering the plane completedly with the brakes. Rudder pedals frozen at the centered position and toebrakes actuated sporatically to keep the plane straight on takeoff roll out. Very odd I thought and cetainly nothing I would do but I figured that since he had been flying many many years longer than me and had much more experience with no airplane damage under his belt. ...If this is how he had been doing it all this time, who was I to judge? I didn't say anything about it and we have never discussed it.

Well just a few weeks after this he was flying his gorgeous, just restored Cessna 120 with 5 hours time since ground up restoration including engine overhaul. He was doing his take off ground roll at a grass strip . This strip is fairly poor in that it contained bare areas in the grass surface with deep loose sand. The sand spots could be avoided usually but since he was doing a lose formation take off he probably didn't have the leeway to completly avoid them. Never the less the sandy spots should have been little more than a nuisance....UNLESS YOU WHERE USING BRAKES TO STEER!.
Now he did not say this is what happened but I JUST KNOW judging from his description that he hit those darn brakes while a wheel would have simply rolled over a sandy spot...instead it locked up... digging deep into the sand and turning the airplane violently and instanty 90 degrees toward a barbed wire fence that lined the runway. His gear snagged in the barbed wire as he rolled through it and flipped him over....end of airplane...a total loss.
I knew the strip well. It was where I got all my primary tailwheel training.
I can't say I have never used my brakes for directional control as a last resort once rudder was fully employed in an extreme crosswind condition because I have. It was just the edge I have needed more than once but rarely.
But boy, if you don't need them...lay off the brakes.

Judicious use of brakes, elevator and power are the key, all applied in concert with eachother.
When making a very short landing in gravel I often land with brakes on and as the skidding digs ruts, the gravel will pile up at which time you can release brakes to roll over the gravel dam and add a touch of air from the prop over the elevater to keep the tail down and you're stopped.
I used to take tailwheel transitioners to a wet runway with white paint letters on it and practice braking as you go across the letters. When you hit the first bar of a P both lightly braked wheels would slide on the paint after leaving the blacktop, then grip again at blacktop, but then only one wheel would slide as it hit the other side of the hole in the P while the other kept traction. Good practice for judicious diferential braking.
Jeremy

That sounds a bit harrowing, Jeremy.

I was a farmer in a former life and harrowing comes naturally.
Re airplanes, it is actually fun to challenge myself and look into the edges while leaving a margin for misjudgement. Probably like your skiing which I never got a good handle on.....then I tried snowboarding and it started to make sense.
Jeremy

Bump for an interesting thread...

I had not thought about the fully down-deflected downwind aileron providing some helpful adverse yaw during the transition to the dead zone. Good stuff.

I have had my M7 235 pull left or right on 3 pt landing an applied rudder with no effect. Hell I stomped on the rudder with no effect. It wasn't until I tapped opposite brake did I regain rudder authority. I believe the key is to tap the opposite brake not slam on one or both. My instructor told me that the cause of this pull toward left or right was because the aircraft was not straight on touch down. Since I concentrate on being straight it doesn't happen as often as it used to but if I am heavy and not straight the pull has happened. If it does I tap brake to straighten her out and it has worked every time. In the past 6 years maybe 9 times most of them in the beginning of my transition form a Citabria to the Maule.
As far as wheel landings what works for me is no flaps, 80 mph, and patience. I hold the airplane off the ground as long as practicable. And when the tail comes down I pull back on the yoke and keep her straight. If needed I tap the brakes to slow her down. I don't do this unless I am running out of runway. Oh yea I use most of the runway. My thinking is to use wheel landings for high cross wind landings where I have control. Like some others have said learn all the tricks & methods. You never know when you will need them. Mother nature is still part of the equation.

Tagging on...

Like many things in life, you sometimes have to use all the available resources, or a combination thereof, to accomplish the task. Directional control can be managed with rudder, brakes, power, or to a lesser degree, with ailerons.

When making a gusty, crosswind landing, I use a tail-low wheel landing technique, rolling the airplane nose down on the mains, straight-arming the flaps to 10 and applying brakes until the tail drops by itself (this could be considered to be highspeed braking)...all this done while looking outside to prevent the quick heading excursion that can result in a groundloop. I straight-arm the flaps to 10 in the 185 to increase airflow over the rudder, even though the Micro Aero VG's have increased rudder authority. Lift is gone and directional control is primarily managed by applying both brakes to slow the airplane and maintain the nose on the (sometimes imaginary) centerline. The difficult task then becomes the taxi in with a strong crosswind, not the landing. This technique has worked for me in the 7ECA, 170, 180/185, Cub and Beaver.

I think many directional control problems occur when the the wind is in a perceived benign state, i.e. calm to light and variable. One perhaps tends to relax with those conditions, the rudder blanks and 'round she goes. There's been alot of good advice in this thread, and one should use the technique that works for them, especially if it is a proven and recommended technique. Go fly with a tailwheel experienced, CFI or an experienced tailwheel pilot and practice wheel landings, 3-point landings and crosswind landings until you reach a good level of proficiency (which is the intent of the tailwheel endorsement in AC61.65E). If your CFI doesn't want to accomplish the above, get another one (always have an alternate in aviation).

This thread has motivated me to get into the confessional. I have a Murphy Rebel and at this point am getting near 300 hours in it. I bought it before I had a TW endorsement, the only tailwheel CFI in town really didn't like the plane , and expressed that often. When it came time to wheel land we had a bit of a mishap. I didn't quite stick it and got into a swerve when the tailwheel came down, he yelled Brakes!!! (only available from the left seat) I tried to straighten it with brakes and ground looped. $10,000 later got back into it and got signed off w/out a wheel landing. He says it doesn't do 'em well ('ala maule). Few months later flew with a very experienced pilot who did some beautifull wheel landings from the right seat, he says it does great.

I can 3 point the hell out of it, but still can't wheel land. Someday I'll get this monkey off my back.
-Brad