Crosswind and wheel landings

Roger Wyatt

Roger Wyatt

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jun 17, 2021
Messages
101
Display Name
Display name:
RogerW
It was crosswind today and I did 3point and Wheel landings. Both went really well. Wheel landings were not as difficult as I had thought. Lots of my PPL crosswind technique translated.

Rudder over controlling is still an issue. Next session should clear it up as it was starting to click.

After and hour and a half I was spent and called it. It was hot and winds were swirling and I was just mentally drained. Thats one of the things I did during my PPL was to evaluate where I was after each circuit and if I felt I was done, better to call it than to learn bad technique.

next session is the 23rd. Hopefully I’ll finish up.
 
Very good. In my experience instructing tailwheel, and even nose wheel, over controlling rudder is generally not the problem. Rather, under controlling rudder is usually the problem. Walking the rudders dynamically and proactively works with gross or slight movement as long as that speed and amount of movement is equal each side of exact longitudinal alignment. In side by side the nose is actually between our toes, and certainly not under the prop. When slow we have to move the rudder significant distance each side to bracket precision perfect. When fast we need to move the rudder much less distance each side of longitudinal alignment to brack perfect. The idea that we can keep perfect by reactive jabbing is true but that technique results is much greater nose movement off perfect longitudinal alignment, and the occasional ground loop. Neither TW airplanes, nor unicycles, work that way. That center of gravity behind you is just itching to come around, so there is no, "hover button." Just be glad you don't have to dynamically and proactively control pedals, cyclic, collective, and throttle. No sweat with the TW airplane, GI, you've got it easy.
 
Excellent Post Jim,

I liked the phrase “Walking he rudder dynamically and proactively.”, I have used the phrase Marching inside the deadband of the rudder like left, right, left, right, left... with small pauses as needed, hold the left rudder just a 1/2 second longer if needed and then move back to right rudder. The main point is keep the rudder and your feet slightly moving, but the nose should make no more than the slightest movement unless you want it to. This will train you to make small corrections almost immediately, and often subconsciously.

With some practice you will feel the pressure on the rudder pedal increase as you reach the edge of the deadband, ie. The center area of movement where the rudder has little of no affect. The width of the dead band can vary a lot from high to low speed, especially in airplanes that land very slow, like cubs and champs.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 
Last edited:
It may seem counterintuitive, but I found that wheel landings were somewhat easier in a crosswind. Why? There seemed to be less of a tendency to “bounce” back in the air rolling just the upwind tire on first. It may have been a bad habit, but on wheel landings with no crosswind I’d tend to slip just a tad at the last moment so as to roll on the right main gear first. Worked for me!
 
Was it a gusty crosswind? How strong was the crosswind component? Grass or pavement? These are some of the factors that go into my choice of landing technique. I default to wheel landings, so I sometimes have to force myself to practice three-point landings in various conditions and three-pointers are the kind I am usually rusty on.
 
Brian,

I like your deadband phrase as well. We need to talk a lot and manipulate the controls as little as possible and using many ways to say the same thing is valid. We are too oriented toward institutional language which often fails to communicate. Wolfgang probably first talked about the critical angle of attack in reference to relative wind. But he also stated that stalls were caused by the pilot pulling back on the stick. That port got lost in translation. Unfortunately tailwheel was so "conventional" that he didn't talk about rudder movement for longitudinal alignment a lot.

Jim
 
iamtheari said:
Was it a gusty crosswind? How strong was the crosswind component? Grass or pavement? These are some of the factors that go into my choice of landing technique. I default to wheel landings, so I sometimes have to force myself to practice three-point landings in various conditions and three-pointers are the kind I am usually rusty on.
Click to expand...

8kts with just a tad of a gust. 5kt crosswind component. Pavement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
@Jimmy

I was fine on the landings, but started oscillating afterwards. We figured out that I was looking about 1500’ ahead rather than at the end of the runway. That helped a lot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I've been working on mastering wheel landings in a Citabria.
 
Palmpilot said:
I've been working on mastering wheel landings in a Citabria.
Click to expand...

Wheel landings for me were easier. They made a lot of sense to me - even with the crosswind. I’m just fighting the rollout!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
We used to call the three point landing a full stall landing. Full stall, stick all the way back, in low ground effect is much, much slower than Vso. Vso is an out of ground effect number. A wheel landing is a good way to handle gusts and crosswind, because we have the airplane level at touchdown. There is no need to be any faster than the full stall, however. We decelerate to near full stall airspeed/attitude in low ground effect and then level the fuselage. In a headwind component we need not give up the free gift of slow ground speed by touching down faster than a normal three point full stall in low ground effect (very slow in light airplanes.)

If we make good wind management of the headwind component, we don't have to fight the roll out. I got going backwards in my Champ one time which was uncomfortable, but we can land at a slower ground speed, same airspeed, in a headwind component.
 
Keep at it and keep expanding your personal envelope when opportunities arise. Eventually you'll be competent (if not actually confident) landing in conditions beyond what you can comfortably taxi in. Ask how I know. :confused:
 
I have some time in a J5 at least for me found it super easy to wheel land. Have not had the same experience in the Aeronca Champ and Chief although I know others seem to have no problem. I am getting better at it(I think) :).
 
A difference in J5 and Champs and Chiefs is the stiffness of the gear bungees. I liked the J5 with students ready to get into the single seat Pawnee at Ag Flight. The stiff bungees on the Pawnee are there to handle 140 gallons in the hopper. The stiff bungees in the J5 are there for a pilot up front and two passengers (stick removed) in the back. With empty hopper in Pawnee or only two in the J5, it is necessary to almost three point and then push the stick forward when in very low ground effect. If we let the mains touch down before stick forward, as with Champs (soft bungees) we get a hoppity hop on the gear but not bounce. With Champ and Chief, slow and pitch to three point and level to touch down wheel landing, But don't put the stick forward until the mains touch. You will have time as the bungee depresses.
 
Daleandee, as a crop duster I made nearly 100% wheel landings yet I agree with most everything you (or your article) said. We started flying before there was a Vso for small airplane guys. Vso has absolutely nothing to do with landing, but I expect you were talking about stall in low ground effect not stall out of ground effect (Vso) as we did before the POH and V speeds. Yes, we have to stall in low ground effect, much slower than Vso, to quit flying.

The main reason I agree with most of what you said is that to wheel land and airplane properly and safely, we need to achieve a three point attitude in low ground effect (flair) just before levelling the airplane to wheel land. Only a slight amount of forward stick is then required to hold most airplanes on the surface, no pressure at all with some (dirty airplanes.) Better visibility is what most crop dusters are after, so much so that the modern jet Ag planes have the heavy tail gear extended so that the airplane is in a near level attitude with all three wheels on the ground. Pipeline guys, mostly in nose gear airplanes, will absolutely have to wheel land TW airplanes in 30 gusting to 50 on the front range. That much gust spread requires a tremendously active throttle in the necessary power/pitch approach with power all the way to touchdown. But at 30-50 headwind component, a 180 with full Fowler flaps and using the throttle rather than extra potential energy of altitude turned into kinetic energy (for grandma and the kids) will touchdown with little enough ground speed that an angle across from downwind corner to upwind edge of runway on down a bit (based on whatever crosswind component) is no real problem. We are talking somewhere between zero and 15 knots. Trying a three point landing with that wind will be a wild ride.

Finally my disagreement. The tailwheel is not the main steering device on a TW airplane, the rudder is. The design of the airplane is to fly, not to roll on the ground. The sooner we can get airborne and level in low ground effect, the safer. The slower we can get in low ground effect before touchdown the safer on landing. The longer we can keep the throttle, the absolute best glide angle and rate of descent control, active on landing the safer. The throttle blasts the elevator and rudder on takeoff and all the way down on a good power/pitch landing without round out and all the way to touchdown. The safest landing is slow and soft with power on the numbers. That takes bouncing, skipping, running around on the surface at high ground speed, and the very dangerous (statistically) go around out of the picture. Yes, the full stall (nothing to do with Vso) landing three point is the only safe attitude either on touchdown or just before levelling the fuselage to wheel land. And wind is our friend. I can't believe how many pilots give up this ground speed control gift from God and land those expensive old classics and antiques at higher ground speed in a fine headwind component than in a no wind condition. Ground speed in auto or aircraft is the killer. Very few fall on short final coming into ground effect. Many more fall on takeoff. Fast airspeed, and with it ground speed in low ground effect, is desirable on takeoff. Slow airspeed, and with it ground speed, is desirable on landing.

Good article. Thanks for the contribution.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Funny thing about that coming from Rare Aircraft is that the New Waco company tells people not to 3 point the YMF-5s.
Click to expand...
I once took a CAF ground school course for the C-46, and they said the same thing about that plane.
 
Jimmy Allen Dulin said:
...as with Champs (soft bungees) we get a hoppity hop on the gear but not bounce...
Click to expand...

Maybe because Champs don't have bungees. They have two types of gear, both are oleo and both are pretty much the same except that the heavy duty gear that was made for the L-16 and got the name "no-bounce" has about six inches of travel. The best way to land that gear is to just drop it on 3-point and, true to it's name, it won't bounce. If you try to grease it on it will feel "hoppity" as it will stay extended and off the taxi springs until you're down under 30 mph and when it does drop it usually will be one side before the other which really weirds people out at first. The best way to wheel land the no-bounce is tail low then aggressive forward stick to compress the oleos.

All planes have their own quirks. If you buy a Maule and get checked out at the factory their gonna tell you to NOT do wheel landings. You can do them but in all honesty the only valid reason would be landing on rocks to protect the tail wheel. In the end, when you get enough time in an airplane the choice of wheel, 3-point or somewhere in between just becomes something you can do on the fly without putting a whole lot of thought into it.
 
I preferred the 7AC Champ to the Citabras at Ag Flight for zero timers, but I am too old and senile to remember everything about them. I do remember the 8A Luscombe had the one big oleo. The way both gears cammed to that single oleo caused the plane to sit tilted a bit sometimes. They have their quirks, but they also have to meet design criteria that makes them all fly like airplanes. They are more alike than different. It would really weird people out if they did not fly pretty much like any other airplane.
 
Jimmy Allen Dulin said:
We used to call the three point landing a full stall landing. Full stall, stick all the way back, in low ground effect is much, much slower than Vso. Vso is an out of ground effect number. A wheel landing is a good way to handle gusts and crosswind, because we have the airplane level at touchdown. There is no need to be any faster than the full stall, however. We decelerate to near full stall airspeed/attitude in low ground effect and then level the fuselage. In a headwind component we need not give up the free gift of slow ground speed by touching down faster than a normal three point full stall in low ground effect (very slow in light airplanes.)

If we make good wind management of the headwind component, we don't have to fight the roll out. I got going backwards in my Champ one time which was uncomfortable, but we can land at a slower ground speed, same airspeed, in a headwind component.
Click to expand...
Correct me if I’m missing something, but if you fly the same airspeed with a lower angle of attack then you’re vertical speed is going to be a heck of a lot faster on the wheel landing, meaning you’re going to hit pretty hard.
 
Salty said:
Correct me if I’m missing something, but if you fly the same airspeed with a lower angle of attack then you’re vertical speed is going to be a heck of a lot faster on the wheel landing, meaning you’re going to hit pretty hard.
Click to expand...
You don’t lower the AOA until you’re about at touchdown.
 
As Daleandee's article pointed out, the slow airspeed advantage of the three point makes it preferable. Lowering the AOA to level the fuselage just before there would be a three point touchdown captures the advantages of both three point and wheel landing. It takes a bit of practice. If a pilot is not going there, then yes, three point is best in light wind/gust conditions. Nose gear is also the preferable configuration as it takes advantage of both techniques. Those of us who have no choice of gear configuration, mainly crop dusters and backcountry pilots who prefer TW (nose gear is just as good on most off field work), need to learn both techniques. Crop dusting TW preference has mostly to do with the heavy load in the hopper. And on the newer jets, the tailwheel is a strong and long fixed gear thing that sits the airplane up almost as flat as a nose wheel. Main gear behind the center of gravity (nose gear type) would throw the weight of the hopper down sharply onto the nose gear in any but feather light landing. We don't plan to land with anything in the hopper, but things happen. I had thirteen forced landings but only dumped once. Should have dumped on a couple more, but mostly got them down without damage.
 
Jimmy Allen Dulin said:
I preferred the 7AC Champ to the Citabras at Ag Flight for zero timers, but I am too old and senile to remember everything about them...
Click to expand...

Here's an old demo video of the new (at the time) gear when Aeronca first came out with it. You can kinda see how it got it's "no-bounce" name. :) Pretty good for spot landing contests but most 7AC's don't have it, they have the short travel version.

 
Jimmy Allen Dulin said:
Finally my disagreement. The tailwheel is not the main steering device on a TW airplane, the rudder is. The design of the airplane is to fly, not to roll on the ground. The sooner we can get airborne and level in low ground effect, the safer. The slower we can get in low ground effect before touchdown the safer on landing. The longer we can keep the throttle, the absolute best glide angle and rate of descent control, active on landing the safer. The throttle blasts the elevator and rudder on takeoff and all the way down on a good power/pitch landing without round out and all the way to touchdown. The safest landing is slow and soft with power on the numbers. That takes bouncing, skipping, running around on the surface at high ground speed, and the very dangerous (statistically) go around out of the picture. Yes, the full stall (nothing to do with Vso) landing three point is the only safe attitude either on touchdown or just before levelling the fuselage to wheel land. And wind is our friend. I can't believe how many pilots give up this ground speed control gift from God and land those expensive old classics and antiques at higher ground speed in a fine headwind component than in a no wind condition. Ground speed in auto or aircraft is the killer. Very few fall on short final coming into ground effect. Many more fall on takeoff. Fast airspeed, and with it ground speed in low ground effect, is desirable on takeoff. Slow airspeed, and with it ground speed, is desirable on landing.

Good article. Thanks for the contribution.
Click to expand...


On a tangent... the discussion above reminded me of a great video about stall/turn recovery in cropdusters. So I waded into the abyss of monetized garbage in utube...

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top