This one was dredged up by jmtgt. Is this good technique? Did this guy do well? I think I can do better...(in flight simulator.)

http://www.backcountrypilot.org/videos/maule_short.mpg

Zane, I recognize that as one of the short landing contests at the Red River Red Neck Fly-In in Oklahoma this past year. That plane belongs to one of the factory guys from Bush Wheels. That landing was done in a crosswind that was burbling over some buildings that were just out of sight, (to the left of the viewer). He did a good job in that instance. It was a Super Cub fly-in and a great time. By the way the short landing contest was won by a bone stock Cessna 170B flown by Bill Rusk. Skill DOES matter! Bill also won the SL contest at the New Holstien Super Cub Fly-in this month. He won it in a Super Cub, and got second in his C170B! The Maules were real close competitors to the Cubs. The results of both those fly-ins are on the Super Cub . org web sight if you are interested. I was at the RRRNFI in my C170B/Lyc, but didn't compete, (Had 10 hours on a complete aircraft rebuild when we arrived). It will land short, but won't compete with the short take off light weight Cubs. Jon

Nice gusting crosswind. That's one of the Maule guys that frequents the fly-ins. He's a pretty damn good pilot, and a very nice fellow. I think he was using throttle to hold the tail down during heavy braking in that landing.

A friend sent me a link to those results.

The results showed some pretty lopsided performances. Landings in the range of 200 ft with takeoffs upwards of 500 ft and some of these were 180 hp cubs. Pretty novice performances for the equipment involved.

Rusk is unquestionably a very skilled pilot who knows how to fly and would do well in just about anything you strap him to.

Had to laugh when a woman challenged the administrator of that site. Asking him to compete with his highly modified 180 hp Super Cub up against a Outfitters 150 hp basically stock cub in Alaska. The challenge was wisely declined. Heck if he put up enough money I'd give him the same challenge a lot closer to home.

The tendency a lot of flatlanders have is to buy a bush plane and load it down with every STC'd item there is. Huge tires, Wing mods, Props, Gear etc. Without ever having really learned to fly the aircraft in it's basic form.

I'll take a skilled pilot in a stock aircraft anyday over a semi skilled pilot in an aircraft overflowing with dingle balls.

Dingleballs! Ha!

I have to say, I like the dingleballs. Having been deprived of them for so long(ultralight pilot) it really seems like fun to outfit your airplane. Plus, everyday is not a STOL contest. If it were, I'd win in my ultralight anyway.

Z

The shortest fixed wing takeoff and landings I ever did were in a Quicksilver ultralight, but I don't think it's possible to pimp one of those out.

The neon light strips are a must....heck they would do a lot of owners about as much good as some of the other stuff their wasting their money on.

Supercubber wrote:I'll take a skilled pilot in a stock aircraft anyday over a semi skilled pilot in an aircraft overflowing with dingle balls.

Hey! This semi-skilled pilot like's his dingleballs!

Well, there's balls and then there's dingleballs

Neon light strips while your flying over the city at night...I'll bet that would light up the switch board at the local PD with UFO sightings.

I was looking at some info on my Maule parts CD and noticed this video that I had not seen before. Too bad the little wheel is on the wrong end...

http://n6ea.com/mauleclip.wmv

Strata Rocketeer wrote:.................. I think he was using throttle to hold the tail down during heavy braking in that landing.

Could you pontificate on that statement? I don't understand how throttle would help keep the tail down- if anything, the thrustline of the prop is above the wheels (duh!) so adding throttle would seem to me to make the tail want to come up, not down. I wheel land and apply brakes with the tail still in the air- sometimes quite hard, if I need to get stopped in a hurry. I use back stick to keep the tail from getting too high in this situation.
The only way I can figure the throttle comment is doing it to put some propwash over the tailfeathers, to increase elevator authority while using back stick to keep the tail down.
Also, adding throttle (thrust) while braking heavily seems to be somewhat defeating ther purpose of the heavy braking.

Eric

zero.one.victor wrote:

Strata Rocketeer wrote:.................. I think he was using throttle to hold the tail down during heavy braking in that landing.

...The only way I can figure the throttle comment is doing it to put some propwash over the tailfeathers, to increase elevator authority while using back stick to keep the tail down.
Also, adding throttle (thrust) while braking heavily seems to be somewhat defeating ther purpose of the heavy braking.
Eric

Putting the prop wash over the elevator was the point I was trying to make, and yes, it would seem to be a delicate balancing act. The plane is almost stopped when power is applied and you're adding power as the slipstream over the elevator diminishes - plus it's not a whole lot of power, just enough to get the job done, so there should be enough braking power to overcome the thrust as the kinetic energy of the plane dissipates. I've heard this technique described before by others and it seemed to me to be just too much to try to do at one time with a lot of potential for trouble - you won't ever see me trying it. You might be right about the thrust line cancelling out any benefit from the prop wash over the elevator, I'm not knowledgable enough about it to say otherwise.

I heard several people who were there describe the landing as I described above, and there was also a discussion about it on the supercub.org site. Looking at the video a little more carefully I'm not so sure that's what Jason really did because the strobing of the prop doesn't seem to be moving much which would indicate that the RPM's weren't changing much during the rollout.

Pontificate? If you feel I'm being dogmatic and pompous in my opinions you have my apologies, that was and is never my intention when I post here.

Strata Rocketeer wrote:Pontificate? If you feel I'm being dogmatic and pompous in my opinions you have my apologies, that was and is never my intention when I post here.

Oh crap! I hope we don't have to stop our pontificating, dogmatic and pompous postings,,, I won't have anything to say, at all...

Go Doug, Your Pompassness! I see the shrine on the top of the panel, drapped in dingleballs next! Haha.

I had an instructor that was able to demonstrate the lightest amount of power to simply return a little elevator authority with heavy breaking. And your right, it's a delicate dance but very effective.
I don't have too many toys on the plane as yet. Am considering VG's, BW's & finding more ways to strip weight (I need to focus on my weight, not the poor plane) I've been running fuel through the lines instead of bolt ons. The only items I have that I wouldn't trade are duble puck Clevelands w/ 8:50's and the elevator gap seal. Consistent 250' landings with full fuel and one person. I would really like to see if VG's would effect this and what if any on T/O.
Of course, I really want to be like Super Dave and have all the toys and fly 600 hrs/year!

Hot dam! I gotta have my CD player or XM Radio running thru the PSE7000cd with soft mute while the kids watch the 9" dvd in the back and otto flies the ILS while I look for traffic

I'm done. No more. I'm not even gonna fill that last hole in the panel. Useful load with full fuel (600lbs) is so pathetic MLB is gonna hafta slow down on the bon-bons