Greetings all. I've been quietly lurking in the shadows for about a year now, reading and wishing. Life events have prevented me from actually flying for fun in light planes, but life events are changing for the better, slowly but surely. I have been reading the posts in the Types section as suggested by our honorable "janitor." I do not wish to start yet another Maule v C185 v SC discussion. However, I would like to solicit a discussion concerning TW vs Trike-geared airplanes. I (unfortunately) still have little TW time. I do have over 5,000 hours in King Airs, B737s, CH-46s, etc. I have about 25 hours in C172, PA-28s. I really want to explore backcountry flying. I am a mountain man at heart (ancestory is hillbilly, no s**t), and really want to begin flying a small plane into the backwoods to camp, fish, maybe even kayak.

I am going to go fly a Maule for the first time Friday up in Dallas at Maule Air Texas. They have several MXT-#s. They also have some M#s. Would you suggest someone like me with little TW time get a Maule Trike or a conventional geared one and just eat the insurance as I build time in it? Or should I get something less expensive like a Stinson 108, C140/170 and build time in it, then step up to more capability like a high powered Maule? Money is somewhat of an issue, but I do have a budget of up to maybe $90K.

Also, while we are at it, I found this little peach that I'm in love with:

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/specs?specnum=57208

What about a 210 Hp Maule vs 235? I fancy using the plane to fly light backwoods flying (nothing too extreme...yet) and also would like to have a respectable cross country ability, say Chicago to Denver at 135 Kts and maybe even one leg. Would this plane do it or would those of you with more experience with this type of flying suggest I go and stick with the tri-geared nose dragger?

I have read the posts and have looked at so many ads. I'm sick of reading and ready to do some Flying! Friday it begins. keep yer fingers crossed my house finally closes on Friday too. Hmmm sell a house and buy an airplane? At least I don't have a(n ex-) wife I have to convince it's a good idea!

Cheers!
AwolArn...

Why not get a nice Pacer and fly it, see if you still need the Maule. Put some big tires and VG's on it and get some experience. If you still need a Maule the insurance will be less. Oh, by the way, the Pacer and Maule fuselages are
just about exactly the same. Best Pacer you can buy will only be $45,000.

I might get in trouble here but in most cases the reason people have Maules and other things is because they can't afford a 180/185. If you are willing to spend that much money you can have a nice 180, and unless you are hauling heavy loads you don't need a 185. The 180 has the most flexible mission profile that I have run across. At altitude I get 135K on 10.5 gal. per hour, yet it will get in and out of tight places. With long range tanks you can go a long distance, read bring something to pee in....Ron

Awol--

The only thing that will help the Insurance cost is Maule time so another TW airpalne will help with you being comfortable in a TW but it won't do much for the cost of being a Low time Maule Pilot. My recomendation is if you are wanting to be good with the Maule than you need to find a good MAULE instructor and learn to fly it and as you build time it will help with the Costs... as for TW vs. Tri Gear I can't say I've never flone a Tri gear....

If you're willing to consider a nosewheel, run with it!

I'm currently trying to find a larger airplane, but without much luck. If I was willing to fly a nosewheel I'd have fifty good options within a short flight of my house.

I don't fly a tailwheel because of any need...I've only landed at one strip where a nosewheel would have been even doubtful. I fly a tailwheel because I love them. I love the way they look, and I love that it takes just a little more effort to fly one. It could be blowing a hurricane and I wouldn't turn my head to watch a nosewheel plane land, but I'll drop whatever I'm doing and watch a tailwheel plane land even in a calm wind.

There just seems to be an art and a display of skill in tailwheels that is lacking in nosewheels. Sort of like watching a person flyfishing verses seeing someone trolling...there's more to it than just how many fish you yank up.

Also, for what it's worth I've been told that a nosewheel adds about $10K to the price of a Maule. You can pay for a few years (ok, maybe two years) of tailwheel insurance with that. That said I'd not advise buying an expensive, powerful Maule to learn tailwheels in.

I had approximately zero tailwheel time when I bought my M5-235C. I took 25hrs of intensive training when I purchased it and have a one to one takeoff landing ratio ( if you don't count the bounces).

Admittedly I have driven between my share of runway lights and paid some fairly high insurance premiums in the past, but I love the plane.

I heard all the horror stories about Maules being difficult to fly, but since other than Champ time I don't have much to compare it with. I personally did not find the Champ any easier to handle than the Maule, just slower.

I have not flown a 210 or 180 hp Maule so no help here.

TD

I manage a flight department that uses 5 MXT 7 180A's, I own a M5 180C.

I personally wish I could trade the MXT 7's for MX7's. The tri gear is easy to fly but I feel it degrades the performance and handling. It is slower than the tailwheel version. I have has problems with cracking spinner bulkheads, exhausts, and carburator intake box. I also have had to repair two engine mounts where screws from the coweling rubbed holes in the mounts. The only repetitive problems with the M5 have been cracking exhaust. After sending them to Dawley, that has diminished.

As for flying, the MXT 7 lands and takesoff easier than the M5. The MXT7 has a longer wing which helps its slow speed charachteristics. Vso for the M5 is 60 mph and 45 for the MXT 7. The M5 has better handling characteristics than the MXT7. It's controls seem crispier and lighter. I am sure this is due to the shorter wing.

The Maule is not a bad taildragger to fly, actually it is quite docile. I routinely check people out in it with 5 to 7 hours of dual.

The M5 210C you are looking at seems nice, I think you will enjoy it.

BTW I too could afford a C180/185, the M5 just fits my mission better.

CUL,
Stan Burks

It really all boils down to what you want to do with your backcountry flying. If you're wanting to fly out to the bush with a friend and a picknic basket then something like a luscombe, 120/140, T-craft would do you just fine. If you're wanting to build a remote cabin, gear up a large hunting camp...etc then something like a 180, Maule, helio, Beaver...etc. would be more suitable. It also depends on where you are planning on flying. If your idea of back country is a well manicured gravel or grass strip then a nose-dragger would do you fine. If you're thinking that you might want to land on places a little less hospitable then a tail-dragger would be the ticket.
You've got a lot of hours but keep in mind that your lack of TW time is also a limiting factor for the near future. You could run out and buy the worlds greatest bush plane but you're not going to be able to use it to it's full potential for quite some time.
If a nose-dragger will suite your needs as far as the places you want to go, then pick one that will suite your needs and your budget. If you're thinking you're wanting to land on a sand bar to visit Uncle Cleetus at the still then I'd go with a tail-dragger. I'd also start out on the smaller end of the spectrum till you built up some TW time and sharpened your back country flying skills. Faster and more powerful TW planes might just end up scaring the shit out of you at this point. Others can add to the list but I think the following planes would make good TW starters.

Luscombe (I owned one and got my private rating in it...great plane)
T-craft
Cessna 120/140
Stinson 108,108-1 thru -3
Cub, Super Cub ($), Super Cruiser ($)

Once you get sharpened up, graduating up would be a lot easier for you.
Your parents didn't buy you a Harley when you were learning to ride a bike did they?

I have never flown a maule so I cant give any advice there but I can tell you your first landing in any taildragger will be an experience but you will catch on very quick so dont be afraid to buy one. some maules dont have brakes on the right so if you buy one like that you may have to rent for the initial checkride (depending on the size of the instructors kigones). there is a very similar M5 on barnstormers (i dont know how to do the link) for under 50,000 may be a better deal if its in good shape.
ps. you have to look under taildragger to find maules on barnstormers.

Only the very early M4 145hp does'nt have brakes on the right and an occasional early M4 180/210/220.

Ya the one my friend had was a M4 220 and he ground looped it on a checkride. I didnt know they were the only ones without right brakes though.

Hammer wrote: I don't fly a tailwheel because of any need......

Ditto what Hammer said about tailwheel airplanes. I can see owning a nosedragger but not as my only airplane.
To me, the breaking point between "affordable" and "unaffordable" is probably around 160 horsepower. Much more airplane and you start getting into more fuel & maintenance costs than I like to pay for a toy. So unless you're gonna be hauling a buncha heavy shit around, you might wanna stick with a lighter plane esp for your first one.

Eric

Greetings AwolArn. I bought a M5-235C last summer, it is my first airplane and I had no prior tw time. I love it, and found the tw transition to be fun. The insurance is expensive, but have reduced it by about 25% in the 1st six months. I am still learning to fly it, dancing my way through T/O and landings, and will be for years to come. I am cautious about the situations I put myself in, and take new challenges in baby steps. (ie strong crosswinds/short strips) I did my instrument training in a 172XP which I think has a very similar IO360 engine compared to the M5-210. I found it to be very smooth and ran great, and that plane is a rental and went TBO. Could I have done everything so far in a 172? Yep. But I hope to baby step my way into the backcountry, and get closer to needing that tw and horsepower next summer. Did I make the right choice? I don't know, but I like my plane, and I love to fly it.
Good luck- Erick

My first plane was an M-6/235. If the most powerful thing you had flown had been a 172, I'd say stay away from a big motor, but youv'e got a lot of time in a lot higher performance than any recip Maule. I wouldn't rule out the 235 though, it's bullet proof reliable, many more to chose from and the carb. model can burn car gas, which should offset the higher fuel burn expense wise.
Don't rule out a C-180 either, they seem to hold resale value better.