Not to start a s__t storm, but this is worth putting out here...


http://airfactsjournal.com/2013/08/why-you-must-fly-a-taildragger/

I doubt you could find many here who would disagree with author, as he's not really a tailwheel evangelist so much as he is a fully-developed skill proponent.

As a pilot who learned in trikes, then transitioned to taildraggers, I acknowledge that my skills weren't fully developed (will they ever be?) when I got my certificate in a C-152. An almost immediate tailwheel/acro course opened my eyes and had me wondering how the hell I had ever been worthy of the certificate prior.

Flying Cubs and the like definitely opens the door to a world of real aircraft control, and only makes your control of a trike that much better. Not much to argue-- At this time a 182 would suit me for everything I do.

I agree with the author, and getting my t/w endorsement really did improve my skill level. That being said, when I was landing last week with winds 18G28 and 50 degrees off the runway and the family loaded up I was pretty glad I was not a low-hour tailwheel pilot.

Good read. For those of us that own nose wheel aircraft, it's hard to justify the tw endorsement. It would have cost me a couple thousand minimum to get signed off in a husky but I still couldn't rent the plane. Around here, the only way I could fly a taildragger PIC is to own one.

I've noticed that flight instructors don't seem to teach anything but crab landings these days, If you see someone hang a wing, they're usually gray haired.

Nosedragger wrote:
I've noticed that flight instructors don't seem to teach anything but crab landings these days, If you see someone hang a wing, they're usually gray haired.

I resemble that remark! I always used to crab my nose draggers when first learning to fly. That's what my instructor taught. But later I bought an M5 Maule and learned the value of a stabilized slip approach in a cross wind and have never gone back -- even when I later owned a nice 182 for a while. In a tail wheel, its important to get that plane tracking straight down the airstrip when landing in bad wind rather then go through the last minute machinations of transitioning to a cross control for touchdown. A nose wheel can straighten you out if transitioning is a bit sloppy, but the tail wheel is less forgiving and often requires a bit of ground effect travel to get perfectly aligned before ground contact. Consequently it is especially important to have that stabilized slip approach on short strips in a tail dragger.

My instructor taught a stabilized slip approach in the 172. He always stressed proper rudder use as well. Was he an anomaly?

I don't think a pilot has to fly a tail dragger to be a competent pilot, but I do agree that a trike tends to hide less than competent stick & rudder skills upon landing. So instead of flying tail draggers, we all need to fly as well as possible--and hopefully we were taught that way. Instead of being satisfied with each landing because it got us on the ground without damaging anything, we should take the time to self-analyze how it could have been better and strive to make better next time.

Cary

I think the Tri-gear versus Conventional gear debate is analogous to a student pilot learning to fly and navigate with a Garmin G1000 versus a traditional 'six pack' of instruments.

Both have the ability and information to result in a successful flight, but one requires more understanding.

MAU MAU wrote:I think the Tri-gear versus Conventional gear debate is analogous to a student pilot learning to fly and navigate with a Garmin G1000 versus a traditional 'six pack' of instruments.

Both have the ability and information to result in a successful flight, but one requires more understanding.

True, but more importantly in this case, more discipline as well. The basic skills can and should be taught in either....the tailwheel airplane demands that they all be used, with discipline.

MTV

I agree with Cary. Flying with a nose gear is no excuse for landing crooked. Landing with perfect longitudinal alignment on the exact spot on the runway, to which we were directing our course, every time will save tin and skin in the future.

Do not miss the point. "Pilots who learn to fly tail wheel airplanes are better stick and rudder pilots". They also transition to other aircraft faster, and are more competent controling the airplane for the amount of hours flown.

I can't speak for the masses, but my tail dragger cert and flying did increase my skill level. A lot of that may have been the type of flying I've been doing in the tail dragger. From a usefulness on pavement perspective there are many many times here in Reno I wish I had a nose wheel. When the winds are variable at 15 kts, it makes for a tricky touchdown in a light tail dragger.

Good notes in the article though, certainly get more proficient with rudder skills on or near the ground and it does require a solid feel for the plane. I did enjoy flying a Glastar in trike configuration though. Much like a 182, it can handle some really oddball situation better than my tail dragger.

The combination of a good instructor and an aircraft that just makes poor technique blatantly obvious is very effective. The mastery learned by flying tailwheel airplanes (or not) can be seen even in the cockpit of airliners.

As a recently minted tailwheel pilot I can attest to the added skill level required to safely fly one. I had over 2000 hours in ultralights and then light sport nose draggers. I felt comfortable in most conditions that my aircraft was rated for. When I moved into my S-7 I was sure it would just be an easy transition. Wrong again.
With just over 100 hours in the S-7 I'm only now getting close to a comfort level in less than perfect weather. 20knot cross winds still causes severe puckering and the occasional prayer. That being said, I'm glad I took the leap and I'm positive I'm a better pilot for it.

Back in th old days (1950s and 60s) when there were a lot of WWII pilots and their influence held sway in the flying world (and nose draggers were fairly new to GA), it was fairly common to use a Cub/Champ/etc. as the primary trainer for intro, solo, up through 20+ hours, then transition to something fast like a C150 to finish out to test for PPL.
There was strong feeling then (at least where I was) that this practice made a far better grade of pilots....
Before long, a lot of FBOs realized that some of the pilots they were washing out could be retained by more forgiving (nose wheel) aircraft. Shortly the FBOs were shedding those TDs fast enough that the price of a reasonable Cub or Champ was shed for frequently less than a $1000. Of course that was when I was in HS and I was making about $.60 an hour with no overtime increase. About that time there developed some what of a disdain for fabric aircraft (newer fabrics/systems since then last a LOT longer than the older materials that had to be replaced surprisingly often). I think that disdain was partially due to all the advertising by GA aircraft makers about their "modern" all aluminum aircraft for sale.

Sorry if it ended up being an ancient history lesson.....

I flew almost a 1000 hours in a P210, through big weather, crossing the Atlantic, crossing the Rockies and the Alps multiple times. I thought I could fly. And then I bought the Stearman and felt like a total beginner again. If you haven't flown tail wheel you really don't know about flying, you just think you do. I now tell any one who is contemplating learning to fly to learn in a cub or something similar...

Flying taildraggers makes you a better pilot, just as learning acro makes you a better pilot also. The more well rounded you are, the more capable you will become. This does not mean that trike pilots are bad, only that there is another skill that they can aquire and grow into. Most taildragger pilots I know bounce back and forth to everthing on the airport. Experimental first flights and all, they a re the ones that get asked.

i too agree with the author, But I think the right instructors can make up for a lot of the difference. I was lucky in that I seem to have stumbled into a very good instructor system way back when. The owner of the company was Mr. stone of "Stone aviation" and I guess that he demanded all of his instructors teach the way he wanted it done. This meant that although we flew piper Tomahawks as trainers we, or at least I, had to learn to control them precisely through all phases of flight, especially takeoffs and landing. My two instructors, Mr. Will Penny and Ms. Suzanne Azbury required absolute control at all times. I would like to take this moment to thank them for that.

Because of the way I was trained I had very little trouble transitioning into a tail wheel plane, in fact due to a wicked nose wheel shimmy one of the tomahawks we used had to be landed and taxied on the mains only, with the nose held slightly off the pavement until you were down to a very slow walking speed. I was taught crabbing approaches, forward and side slips, speed, attitude and glide slope control. I didn't know this was the "right way" of doing things at the time, it was just what they demanded of me.

Having flown with others who went through the more common training I know this was somewhat unusual to say the least.

In the past 10 to 12 years there seems to me to have been a significantly increasing interest in flying taildragger and in instructors willing to instruct in their taildragger airplanes. In 2000 I was looking for tail wheel instruction and could not find an instructor with a taildragger airplane within less than about a 6 or 8 hour drive. There were plenty of instructors close by that said they would instruct tail wheel if the student provided the airplane, but not in their own.

Today taildragger instruction in instructor provided planes seems to be ready available almost everywhere. I wonder if the increase in instruction availability is due to the number of tail wheel LSA aircraft or vise versa. Or is this just a local anomaly?

Whatever!!!!