z3skybolt wrote:Well....I will disagree with you on flying the Pitts. I owned a Pitts for 10 years, wheel landed only a few times just for practice. Everyone I know , including some well known Pitts flyers always 3 pointed.

...there is a chance that I am a lousy pilot, don't know how to fly my Maule, something aerodynamically is wrong with my airplane: or all three. But I find it impossible to make wheel landings in my M-5 without carrying a higher approach speed than I do with a typical approach culminating in a three point landing.

I typically approach at 60 mph indicated, carrying power for a three point landing. If I want to make a spot landing for the shortest rollout I will approach at 55 mph and carry a bit of power right to the touchdown. Such approach speed requires a pitch attitude which results in a very tail low attitude in which, if I am not careful, the tailwheel will touch before the main gear. Something that has occurred on a few occassions. Now when approaching at 55/60 mph for an intended three point landing...I have "accidently" had the mains touch first with the tailwheel an inch or two off of the runway and 2 or 3 seconds before the tailwheel touched down. Such a landing is always a surprise, unintended, very sweet and....I suppose it could be considered a wheel landing. But what is the point of a wheel landing that has the mains on a second or two before the tailwheel anyhow?

If I want to make a wheel landing I must fly faster....at least 70 mph indicated. Otherwise the tail low attitude is as indicated above and I end up with a three pointer any how.

Now if I want to make a three pointer with an approach speed of 70 ish indicated I can do that. Having stated that I can make a wheel landing if I approach at 70 ish....then one could argue that I do not have to fly any faster for a wheel landing than a three point landing. However in my airplane if I carry the higher airspeed and make a three point I have to float down the runway and bleed of the airspeed. Otherwise a higher speed, three point touchdown, results in an airplane that doesn't want to quit flying and so we skip and bounce along a bit until the excess lift is killed off.

Now Mr. Maule told me that there NEVER is a reason to make a wheel landing in a Maule. One would assume that he is talking about a hard surface runway or at least a smooth runway surface. Well...he may be right under those conditions and as long as one operates within the demonstrated cross wind component limits. But my experience has demonstrated over and over that if the cross wind component is say 20 or 25 kts. and/or there are very strong gusty winds....my airplane better be landed on the mains first and it better be flown at speed higher than one would normally use for a three point landing. I've done it both ways many times. The only time I darn near ground looped or ran off the runway was when I made a three point landing with a 20 kt. cross wind component and gusts. On that very occassion I was intentionaly practicing landing under those conditions on a paved runway. I made 10 or 12 such landings that day. Every wheel landing was a handful but fully controllable. After two three point landings under those conditions.... which resulted in a couple of wild roll outs.....I decided that Mr. Maule was full of baloney. You would be correct to say that the airplane was being operated beyond it's intended limits. I would plead guilty but add that most of us have found ourselves in such situations unintentionally. In anticipation of such I have always wanted to know the limits of my capability and that of my airplane....just in case.

I flew various models of the Twin Beech on mail runs for hundreds of hours. 100% of the Twin Beech pilots that I ever met made wheel landings. One had to carry extra speed . Otherwise the pitch attitude would result in tail low attitude and a three point landing. Not a good idea in that airplane. Point being....like in my Maule....one had to carry higher airspeed in the Beech in order to make a wheel landing and not an unintended and undesirable three point landing.

If one reads the history of Continental Airlines going back to late 30s and early 40s one will find that there was a raging battle, among their pilots, over how to land the DC-3. The Chicago based pilots always made wheel landings. The Houston based pilots all made three point landings. The arguments continued until the Houston based pilots started flying routes into the Windy City of Chicago. Not long after that....the mandatory standard became...wheel landings, carrying a bit more speed. Not saying it cannot be done either way. Just saying history indicates one was safer than the other....much like my experience in the Twin Beech.

And....I double dog dare you to make three point landings in a Pitts S-1. Approach speeds are high and three point attempts result in many skips and bounces off of the runway. I only met one pilot who could do it successfully. He was an airshow guy who said that every Pitts pilot he had ever met, including yours truely, found it impossible. Different airplanes. Different results.

I will continue to fly the Maule under various conditions as I have for the past 9 years. But I will also defer to the pros here and accept any criticism or lessons in aerodynamics offered.

Bob