Chris In Marshfield wrote:.... I get the feeling that I'm flying this plane too fast in the pattern if I'm treating it like a 172, so I want to get some time up high and slow so I can figure out how fast I should be bringing it in, and how quickly it descends......

I'm glad to hear that you're gonna actually experiment with it. It never fails to surprise me how many people will talk about what speed they should use for approach, but when you ask them what it stalls at their reply starts out with "the book says...". I always suggest that they should go out and do some ease-into-it power-off (aka approach) stalls, and see what their airspeed indicator says when it lets go to get a good baseline reference.

hotrod180 wrote:I'm glad to hear that you're gonna actually experiment with it. It never fails to surprise me how many people will talk about what speed they should use for approach, but when you ask them what it stalls at their reply starts out with "the book says...". I always suggest that they should go out and do some ease-into-it power-off (aka approach) stalls, and see what their airspeed indicator says when it lets go to get a good baseline reference.

Yeah, I had little choice about that when I started flying my '65 Champion 7ECA... There literally is no pilot's manual available – no POH, no "Owner's Manual", only a 3"x4" Limitations page that lists CG limits, and a few other miscellaneous tidbits. Apparently back in those days, "real pilots" didn't need fancy manuals, only a placard or two...

I created an engine power vs fuel-flow chart by cribbing from an old C-150 manual (surprisingly accurate after I finally located an O-200 operator's manual and validated everything), and likewise cribbed from a later-model, higher powered (O-235 vs O-200) 7ECA manual to do some performance estimates, and created a couple of tables for takeoff "estimates" and cruise "estimates" that I'm still trying to verify. The book numbers are all with wheel pants installed, and I've got mine off for grass field operations, so that's not helping much...

The very first thing my tailwheel CFI and I did was to go out and do a bunch of power-on and power-off stalls, noting the attitude, feel, and (last and definitely least important) the actual ASI readings. My plane stalls almost 10 mph (indicated) slower than the later-model "book" figures (41 mph vs 51 mph in the later-model book). I suspect that the lighter, smaller engine and more 'draggy' landing gear (oleo struts vs flat spring) may result in "slower is better" performance, since I also seem to get a slightly higher rate of climb around 10 mph below the manual's Vy. I've done the 3-leg GPS ground-speed comparison, and the ASI seems to be reasonably accurate (maybe reading 1-2 mph lower than actual).

Anyway, after learning where my plane stalls, doing 3-point landings was a lot easier. If I had tried to do them at 51 mph (versus the 41 mph actual stall speed), the wing would still have been flying, and I would have been ballooning all over the place. Honestly, at 51 mph, the airplane just doesn't feel like it's anywhere near ready to land, so I'm glad I took the time to learn the actual "look and feel" of the stall before trying to land. Maintaining directional control was touch enough on that first landing, without having to deal with pilot-induced oscillation!

At this point I strongly prefer 3-point landings, and consistently do them bette. Learning to do a wheel landing well enough to get signed off was a lot harder for me, for some reason. I finally learned to do a "tail-low" wheel landing reasonably well. I know a lot of people (my CFI included) who prefer them in crosswinds, but thus far I'm still more comfortable 3-pointing it even with a good crosswind. So I keep practicing those wheel landings, hoping I'll eventually get better, or learn to dislike them a bit less – LOL.

Approaching 40 hours of TW time now, and she's still teaching me something on every flight!

Chris In Marshfield wrote:I'm mainly waiting for this Wisconsin weather to stabilize so I can get some quality time with my favorite tailwheel instructor. I got the checkouts that the insurance company needed, but I really want to perfect my technique in this plane. I get the feeling that I'm flying this plane too fast in the pattern if I'm treating it like a 172, so I want to get some time up high and slow so I can figure out how fast I should be bringing it in, and how quickly it descends.

I haven't been in any situation where I felt I was unsafe and putting myself into a position I wasn't ready for. But I'd certainly like to become "one with the beast". That, and I think I need some Stearman time with the same instructor.

Good for you! Both in the acquisition and in your attitude. Get some dual till you've seen some of the edges, and you're starting to get comfortable with the plane.

Most of all, enjoy your ownership.

MTV

Welcome to the Maule Family!! Nice plane!

So yesterday afternoon, because it was such beautiful flying weather for the first time in what seems like ages, I took the Maule (MX-7-180A) up to see what kinda gumption it has. The air was like glass with a light breeze, and it was a perfect opportunity to do a 3-course GPS run. So I set up at about 4000 feet, firewall everything and leaned it for best power (about 3/4" out, it seems), and I let 'er rip.

The airspeed indicator seemed to level out at about 128mph, so that's what I went with for my reference point. I monitored the GPS ground speed at 000, 120, and 240 degree headings, and it averaged out to roughly 116kts/133mph. Couple that with air temp and altitude, and TAS is pretty darn close.

So what I know now is a couple of things:

1. The airspeed indicator is accurate
2. I ain't goin' any faster than 115kts/130mph on the best day

Unless I'm in a dive, then I could probably hit 135

Since last night was nice and calm, I did some pattern work to see if I could arrest some of this landing anxiety I have. As I may have mentioned, I've been flying this thing like a 172 in the pattern. I've been thinking, based upon readings in the archive, that that's just way too fast for a Maule.

So as I'm setting up for landing, I took a good look at the altimeter. Dang, that white arc goes way the hell down there, doesn't it? So instead of final at around 70-73, 65 or so when I cross the numbers, I took about 10mph off of those numbers to start with. It's amazing how much time you have to think about things when approaching the runway at 60mph.

When it was time to touch down, I wasn't really thinking much about the airspeed indicator, just trying to feel for how quickly the beast was sinking and arresting it with a bit of power, trying to keep my landing spot in sight. Just before I touched down I heard the stall horn beep, and landed firmly in a 3-point. Not too shabby. With some practice, I'll bet I could do it in 5-7mph less pretty easily. Just need to get the feel for it.

I'll be spending some time with my favorite tailwheel instructor soon and working on the "Attitude Flying" technique shown in the BCP video archive. My instructor is a very analytical pilot and instructor, and I'm sure he'll have some great tips for me. And I'm sure we'll get some time in his Stearman somewhere mixed in there, too. Smile You probably don't fly a 220 Stearman without knowing a thing or two about energy management.

Yes, John's Stearman is a beast! I would like to get time in it too some day...when it gets a little warmer out! Sounds like your settling into that Maule well and I hope to see it at Wausau sometime.

Bill

Congrats on the Maule! Still pricing and dreaming. Insurance is cheaper on 200+hp up here, a little odd to me more hp is cheaper.

woolvz wrote:Congrats on the Maule! Still pricing and dreaming. Insurance is cheaper on 200+hp up here, a little odd to me more hp is cheaper.

Could be that in the mountains and such that more power is better, so (slightly) lower likelihood of an incident. I'm a flatlander, so can't speak with authority, but have heard that mountain winds can be a bear to get out of or deal with when flying a lower-powered craft.