My tailwheel training impressions..

Ed Haywood said:
If you really want to see an argument, get a couple of Pitts guys going on wheel landings.
Click to expand...
Haha, well really it's just a few Pitts guys who like doing wheelies who entertain themselves by claiming that people say you shouldn't wheel land a Pitts, when in fact almost nobody actually says that. They just have fun dispelling a non-existent myth.

That being said, I'd do a wheelie about one in every hundred landings or so in my S-1S just for the helluvit. It was laughably pointless in this airplane regardless of wind, but it wheel landed like any other tailwheel airplane.

 
iamtheari said:
I have long held that, no matter how good you are at something, there is a 12-year-old girl somewhere out there who is better than you. Sometimes, the 12-year-old girl is your 2-1/2-year-old nephew.
Click to expand...
As a former Navy Rescue Swimmer, he’ll appreciate that.:rofl:
 
Aceman said:
I just finished my 3rd training session with a Super Decathlon to get my tailwheel endorsement and it's not going well at all.

While the plane behaves like I would expect in flyiing around and holding heading and power, I'm having a really hard time on the landings. Specifically the wheel landings. I'm used to setting up my approaches high and with speed in the glider but I can't seem to setup final approach with the correct speed and altitude in a tailwheel. So there's that to master, however, what's really a problem is being able to touchdown on the wheels without the plane getting out of control. Most of my landings bounce and continues to bounce over and over again before I have to do a go-around. It seems very weird to me that the plane wants certain things at specific stages of the landing and it's tripping me up. I am finding that I don't know how to keep the wheels from bouncing and to stay on centerline with using ailerons. I have to give it more throttle to stop my decent right at the point of touchdown and then making the wheels touch the ground. Then I have to fight for position on the runway. Using ailerons and then push forward on the stick to keep the tail from touching the ground.. then I have to steer with very slight rudder inputs (which is very sensitive), after that I need to keep the tail up until there is no more pitch authority and then push the stick back.

All of this is humbling me big time as I am pretty good at landing the glider and keeping it controlled as I touchdown.

Any advice would be extremely appreciated as at this point, I have no idea how I will be able to improve this wheel landing.

Takeoffs are getting better but the landings are horrid.
Click to expand...
Some of this is redundant but as a Luscombe pilot and CFI for the past 44ish years I think I'm qualified to give some advice.

Flying is energy management. Too much energy when you land and you go flying again. Land with the stick all the way back. To do this flare to a level attitude a few feet in the air and then keep bringing the stick back for the sole purpose of maintaining those few feet. Do not even think about landing. As you slow the nose will rise to the 3 point attitude (you know what this is because it is the attitude the airplane sits at on the ground.) Hold that three point attitude while continuing to bring the stick back. You will stall and plop on the runway. There is no more energy left and you will not bounce. If the stick is not all the way back in your lap then you still have excess energy. Remember flying is energy management.

Also note, and I even deal with this instructing professionals in jets, you must look at the far end of the runway, not close in front of the nose. If you look close in front of the nose you will over control on the rudder. With a tail dragger the tail will stay behind you so long as you don't let it off its leash. The leash is your feet. Of leach it is a creature of momentum. As you make a rudder input the tail starts to swing in the opposite direction. If the rudder input is too large the tail will continue around before you can stop it. So what's a poor pilot to do? Look at the other end of the runway. Get the sight picture for straight. Add rudder to point the nose in the direction needed to achieve straight. Immediately take it out to neutral. If it looks like it is going to go beyond straight use a touch of opposite rudder to stop it from doing so. This is why taildragger pilots are always "dancing" on the rudder. It is a constant exercise in keeping the tail momentum under control.

As far as looking out the side. I don't see the advantage to taking your eyes off the goal (going straight) for any reason. Some people may use this to judge altitude before the begin the flare or in judging the round off, but other than that it is not helpful.

Last but not least. Try to find a nearby grass runway. Things just to happen slower on grass.
 
Arnold said:
As far as looking out the side. I don't see the advantage to taking your eyes off the goal (going straight) for any reason.
Click to expand...

In some aircraft the nose obstructs the view of the far end of the runway in 3 point attitude. In others, the person sitting in front of you does the obstructing. In either case, you have to use your peripheral vision to maintain alignment once the flare starts. Usually less of an issue for side-by-side seating.
 
Pinecone said:
Some aircraft you can't see anything over the nose at landing attitude. :D
Click to expand...
I suppose you are correct about aircraft like ye ol' Spirit of St. Louis, but a number the of people that I've encountered that prefer wheel landings do them for precisely this reason - improved visibility.
 
Pinecone said:
Some aircraft you can't see anything over the nose at landing attitude. :D
Click to expand...

Taken from the right seat in a “full stall” landing in a Cirrus:

16831395688_3d184a73e7_n.jpg


If I see a student having inconsistent landings, I try to check out where they’re looking. If they’re craning their necks to try to see over the nose as it comes up and blocks their view, I think I’ve found the root of their problem. Getting them to look out to the side is often the cure.
 
Wheel landings in citabs are really sweet. Knock your airspeed on final down by 5 kts, get it down low and get your Vertical speed down to near zero. Then slowly back out the venier. Touch is alomst imperceptiable...it rolls on...stick forward a tad....and stick it down.

The key is get your vertical speed down B4 you touch and then let it settle on with a relatively fixed pitch attitude.
 
bbchien said:
Wheel landings in citabs are really sweet. Knock your airspeed on final down by 5 kts, get it down low and get your Vertical speed down to near zero. Then slowly back out the venier.
Click to expand...
Interesting technique considering no Citabria has a vernier anywhere. If you're thinking of the Decathlon, they have a vernier on the prop of course, so are saying you take your hand off the throttle and start rolling the prop course as the airplane eases down to the runway? That would be an interesting technique to say the least.
 
Last edited:
RoscoeT said:
Interesting technique considering no Citabria has a vernier anywhere. If you're thinking of the Decathlon, they have a vernier on the prop of course, so are saying you take your hand off the throttle and start rolling the prop course as the airplane eases down to the runway? That would be an interesting technique to say the least.
Click to expand...

Newer Decathlons also have a mixture vernier, FYSA. Older ones can be easily retrofitted, as I did with mine. Unsure if Citabria is similar. Obviously tangential to the point you are making, of course.
 
I find Citabria/Decathons a pain to wheel land. Especially with someone in the back seat. The spring steel, emphasis on SPRING makes it want to leap back in the air without the benefit of airspeed.

My CAP-10 with oleos doesn't care what the attitude it, it just lands. :D
 
I've got an old Citabria (Champion) with the oleo gear. They called it the "no bounce" gear and believe me you can't get that thing to bounce even if you try.

 
Silvaire said:
I've got an old Citabria (Champion) with the oleo gear. They called it the "no bounce" gear and believe me you can't get that thing to bounce even if you try.

Click to expand...
If I didn’t know better, I’d swear that was a former student of mine.

I know better, though, because the stick was moved the right way when they were ground-looping it. ;)
 
Arnold said:
As far as looking out the side. I don't see the advantage to taking your eyes off the goal (going straight) for any reason. Some people may use this to judge altitude before the begin the flare or in judging the round off, but other than that it is not helpful.
Click to expand...
Looking out the side is not only about tailwheels. There are tricycle airplanes which for many pilots, obstruct forward vision in the landing flare. Basic 172, 182 and Mooney Ovation come to mind right away. At least the tail wheel folks have the wheel landing option to compensate.

Looking out the side is not taking your eyes off the goal. It’s using peripheral cues to gauge both vertical and lateral position. Look for Jason Miller’s “Lindbergh Reference” videos.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Looking out the side is not taking your eyes off the goal. It’s using peripheral cues to gauge both vertical and lateral position. Look for Jason Miller’s “Lindbergh Reference” videos.
Click to expand...

Another Cirrus pilot posted this as an addendum to an article I wrote about where to look on landings:

49682971242_53dc5d8f94_z.jpg


Not doubting that some pilots may be successful focusing on the far end of the runway, but as midlifeflyer reiterated, many modern planes literally force you to look elsewhere towards the end of the flare, or a pilot needs to land a tad fast so as not to have their view blocked by the nose/panel. And in a taildragger, that’s just asking for a bounce.
 
FastEddieB said:
Not doubting that some pilots may be successful focusing on the far end of the runway,
Click to expand...
the problem with “far end of the runway” is differences in runway length. It’s not particularly helpful try to look two miles away on a 12,000’ runway. Even when looking out the front works well - Tiger, Cirrus, DA40NG for example - when I work with someone with landing issues, I talk in terms of a focal point about 1200-1500’ down the runway. For the motorcycle riders, the 4-6 seconds down the road often taught. But the real goal is to help them find their good balance between straight ahead and peripheral vision.
 
Look towards the end of the runway, feel the ground effect, use the runway edge for alignment, and work it on. Alternative, for full stall, “don’t let it land.” When it does anyhow after running out of elevator, there you go.

My guess is that landings improve when one has mastered the bit about feeling the change in sink and drag as the aircraft goes into ground effect.
 
I learned to fly a while ago in a J-3. One of the three Cubs had a full swiveling tail wheel. I mean the same as on the front of a supermarket cart. It was a brisk, windy day and the wind was a direct cross wind. I had recently made my first solo. My CFI was front seat & I was in back. It finally got me on the 3rd or 4th landing. My first ground loop. The wing only went halfway down to the ground. No damage and my CFI said, "let's do another."
Years later, I restored a Luscombe 8A. Time to air up the 600-6 tires. Why not pump them up to the same pressure as my car tires? 35 psi. Later, when I got her flying, it seemed like she was somewhat skittish when taxiing. I broke out both the Pilot's handbook and my maint manual. One said 15 psi, the other said 15 to 18 psi. She handled like a sweetie after adjusting tire pressure.
My wife aired up the VW's front tires because "They looked a little squat." Later, I drove it and it handled hyper sensitively. Got the Guage out and it said "70 plus psi." After adjusting pressure, it was back to normal.
I'm just saying, if you are having directional issues, check the tire pressures.
 
Albany Tom said:
I'm just jumping in to say to the OP that I think you're being too hard on yourself. 3 lessons and you don't have a feel for wheel landings yet? I learned tailwheel first, in a cub, and it was more than 30 for me before wheel landings made any sense. Three point much simpler for me.
Click to expand...
Thanks man. That does give me some hope. My 4th lesson was much better than the others but still not there yet to do it solo.
 
Dan Thomas said:
I think his instructor is being too hard on him. Wheel landings should be left until everything else is mastered. Three-pointers is what he should be getting.
Click to expand...
I started wheel landings on lesson 4. I'm still unable to figure out that the plane is down on the ground from the sight picture of the runway ahead compared to the fuselage of the plane.
 
Aceman said:
I started wheel landings on lesson 4. I'm still unable to figure out that the plane is down on the ground from the sight picture of the runway ahead compared to the fuselage of the plane.
Click to expand...
It's more a feel thing. Visual sets it up, but wheel contact is a subtle response to added drag.
 
When I’m alone and practicing wheel landings, I try to predict the moment the wheels touch. “Right … about….now,” out loud. When I’m practiced up, I’m usually right on it — sometimes I say it a moment early, which is ok, and rarely late, which usually means I was sinking too fast. I might hop a little, hop a lot, or go flying a bit longer.
 
Dan Thomas said:
One can take off in most taildraggers, including Citabrias, with the airplane in the three-point attitude, tailwheel still on the ground with the mains. It couldn't take off if the wing was stalled.
Click to expand...
This has to do with power on (take-off) vs. power off configuration (landing). Think it’s the Citabria that has an admonition on the obstacle (Vx) take-off procedure to lower the nose immediately on loss of power. I.e., they know that while the wing will fly at 58 knots (from memory, sorry if off a bit) with full power, it won’t continue to do so with loss of power.

So you can fully stall a tailwheel airplane in the flare - try it in a 170 with stock gear - if you hook the tail, the mains will still be about 6” off the ground and the aircraft will then stall and drop down. Other aircraft will 3-point a little nicer, depending on the speed at which the stick is brought back in the flare.
 
Steamflyer said:
This has to do with power on (take-off) vs. power off configuration (landing). Think it’s the Citabria that has an admonition on the obstacle (Vx) take-off procedure to lower the nose immediately on loss of power. I.e., they know that while the wing will fly at 58 knots (from memory, sorry if off a bit) with full power, it won’t continue to do so with loss of power.

So you can fully stall a tailwheel airplane in the flare - try it in a 170 with stock gear - if you hook the tail, the mains will still be about 6” off the ground and the aircraft will then stall and drop down. Other aircraft will 3-point a little nicer, depending on the speed at which the stick is brought back in the flare.
Click to expand...
You lower the nose to maintain best glide, not to prevent stall. Have you done full stalls at altitude? Power on and off? The nose is WAY up there. In a three-point attitude, it will just sink real well, and that's what you're seeing when you get the tail on first. Sink. It gets rough because the nose comes down and lowers the lift due to decreasing AoA, and the sink increases.

And in a stall you'll usually get some wing drop. I never got wing drop on any "full-stall" landing, including in 180s and 185s and a lot of other smaller taildraggers.

The old Ercoupe was stall-proof. Its elevator travel was limited to prevent stalls as a means of preventing spins. But lots of them got pranged anyway on landing as the pilot got too slow, and those short wings can develop awesome sink rates. Not stalled, but it wrecks the airplane anyway.
 
Steamflyer said:
This has to do with power on (take-off) vs. power off configuration (landing). Think it’s the Citabria that has an admonition on the obstacle (Vx) take-off procedure to lower the nose immediately on loss of power. I.e., they know that while the wing will fly at 58 knots (from memory, sorry if off a bit) with full power, it won’t continue to do so with loss of power.
Click to expand...
It will fly at 58 knots, but it won't maintain that 58 knots without power unless you get the nose down right now.
Steamflyer said:
So you can fully stall a tailwheel airplane in the flare - try it in a 170 with stock gear - if you hook the tail, the mains will still be about 6” off the ground and the aircraft will then stall and drop down. Other aircraft will 3-point a little nicer, depending on the speed at which the stick is brought back in the flare.
Click to expand...
If you touch tail first, that won't make the plane stall. What it will do is push the tail up (or rather, keep the tail from descending as the rest of the aircraft continues to descend), rapidly reducing the AOA, thus rapidly reducing lift and keeping the airplane firmly planted on the ground with no bounce. Tailwheel first landings worked very nicely in my Hatz.
 
Dana said:
what it will do is push the tail up (or rather, keep the tail from descending as the rest of the aircraft continues to descend), rapidly reducing the AOA, thus rapidly reducing lift and keeping the airplane firmly planted on the ground with no bounce.
Click to expand...
And that is why 3 point landings (of which tail first is a subset) are better in most TW planes. When tail is in contact with ground, AoA and lift cannot be increased. Since lift at touchdown was insufficient to fly, aircraft must stay on the ground.

It also shows why wheel landings can be problematic. The tail can be lowered, so AoA and lift can be increased. That, combined with spring energy from gear, can cause airplane to fly again.

IMO the stall discussion is irrelevant. At touchdown, the wing is not producing enough lift to hold the aircraft in the air. Depending on washout, the wings are likely stalled at the roots but not at the tips. Whether it is fully or partially stalled is of no consequence. What matters to the pilot is the understanding that it is not making enough lift to fly.
 
Ed Haywood said:
And that is why 3 point landings (of which tail first is a subset) are better in most TW planes. When tail is in contact with ground, AoA and lift cannot be increased. Since lift at touchdown was insufficient to fly, aircraft must stay on the ground.
Click to expand...
In a steady wind, yes. But I once made a 3 point landing in my Hatz on a gusty day, rolled a few feet, then found myself 10' up in the air again when a gust hit me, requiring a second landing.
Ed Haywood said:
It also shows why wheel landings can be problematic. The tail can be lowered, so AoA and lift can be increased. That, combined with spring energy from gear, can cause airplane to fly again.
Click to expand...
A wheel landing can be a better choice on a windy day. When you touch down on the main wheels only, the aircraft is in a more or less level attitude and pushing the stick forward will keep it firmly planted even if hit by a gust. Depending on your rudder authority and wind direction, you can keep it level until well below flying speed so that when you finally do lower the tail you're going slow enough that a sudden gust won't pick you up again like it did to me.

I usually wheel land if there's a significant or gusty crosswind, and keep the tail up until I'm at a speed where the tailwheel is more effective than the rudder.
 
Dana said:
I usually wheel land if there's a significant or gusty crosswind, and keep the tail up until I'm at a speed where the tailwheel is more effective than the rudder.
Click to expand...
You have way more tailwheel time than me, but I prefer to 3 point in gusty conditions. Simply because I don't want to land on purpose more than once, and to me if I'm on two wheels the plane is still flying. Actually it's really close to flying just sitting on the ground. Now this is all based around a cub, which has pretty light wing loading, and not a lot of tailwheel authority ever.
 
Albany Tom said:
You have way more tailwheel time than me, but I prefer to 3 point in gusty conditions.
Click to expand...

Whatever works for you.

But beyond a certain level of gustiness, I’d be nervous in a 3 pointer. Just as you’re about to touch down, the wrong gust at the wrong time can pop you back in the air, with precious little margin above the stall, if any. Which can make an abort at that point problematic. Or a different crosswind gust can weathervane the plane right as it’s touching down.

I’m more in Dana’s camp. Things start to go wrong in a wheel landing, you should have some extra speed to get the plane in the air again and regroup. Yes, it can get squirrelly when it’s time to drop the tail, but most of the excess speed is gone at that point, and the key is to get the tailwheel on the ground assertively and not get stuck in no-man’s-land between tail up and tail down.
 
FastEddieB said:
Whatever works for you.

But beyond a certain level of gustiness, I’d be nervous in a 3 pointer. Just as you’re about to touch down, the wrong gust at the wrong time can pop you back in the air, with precious little margin above the stall, if any. Which can make an abort at that point problematic. Or a different crosswind gust can weathervane the plane right as it’s touching down.

I’m more in Dana’s camp. Things start to go wrong in a wheel landing, you should have some extra speed to get the plane in the air again and regroup. Yes, it can get squirrelly when it’s time to drop the tail, but most of the excess speed is gone at that point, and the key is to get the tailwheel on the ground assertively and not get stuck in no-man’s-land between tail up and tail down.
Click to expand...
I'll agree what I'm doing may not be the most common. But my experience with the last few feet above the ground 3 point isn't a problem with sudden gusts, it's much more of a concern when the wind stops or decays a lot. Coming in steep, just a bit above stall, if the wind picks up it's not going to put me very far in the air, but if it drops from significant to none, just as I'm a bit above the ground, it's not ideal. But...and just maybe me...I'd rather have that problem than the potential lack of directional control going from tail up to tail down. In the former case I've got to react quickly enough to go around at a foot off the ground or whatever, the latter to keep the CG between the wheels with diminished rudder authority.

Maybe the way I was trained, maybe I'm using the tools I'm most comfortable with, maybe it's because I'm barely 3 digit hours in TW. I don't *think* I'm the only pilot in the world that prefers 3 point over wheel in gusts, but maybe I am. And maybe I need more wheel landing time in the wind.
 
This is back to neverending debate territory, but it's not just a preference thing. It's partly preference and also aircraft characteristics. Some types are much more suited to one type of landing than the other, especially when things get sporty. I think it's more interesting discussing aircraft specifics than who's generally in what camp or the other.
 
RoscoeT said:
This is back to neverending debate territory, but it's not just a preference thing. It's partly preference and also aircraft characteristics. Some types are much more suited to one type of landing than the other, especially when things get sporty. I think it's more interesting discussing aircraft specifics than who's generally in what camp or the other.
Click to expand...
:) I'm not skilled or experienced enough to debate it. But I do think at least a bit of it is based on aircraft.
 
What kind of winds and gusts are you folks referring to when you say things like "significant or gusty crosswind," "gusty conditions," "sudden gust," etc. in this thread?
 
Wrapped up the tailwheel endorsement today, it was a challenge and also enjoyable. I'm training now for CFI initial and it was humbling and valuable to me to put myself back into the student mindset of learning something new and even a mini solo experience. Keep up the training OP, you may train enough to think maybe this isn't for me and then it clicks and you find yourself with a new addiction.
 
Aceman said:
I started wheel landings on lesson 4. I'm still unable to figure out that the plane is down on the ground from the sight picture of the runway ahead compared to the fuselage of the plane.
Click to expand...
That's the Citabria spring gear, it's really mushy and difficult to tell when it makes contact so it's not really your fault. The sight picture isn't going to work because not all runways are the same width. Just keep at it and eventually you'll get it and wonder what all the fuss was about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top