ppl training on tailwheel

[wabower]

I didn't say that. I said gratuitous high-speed taxiing as described in some of the early posts, especially early in the lesson sequence, is unnecessary. And it is. Everything a student needs to know can be incorporated into the normal training syllabus without the need for specific session.

I answered the question about the 5-year study of taildragger accidents as best I could. If you've read NTSB reports, you obviously know that they are consistent in format, but inconsistent as to the amount of information provided to the reader. Some provide a fairly detailed account of the event, some don't.

Hey, wait a minute, Wayne -

First, you denounce exersizes involving high-speed taxiing because the statistical evidence involving said manuevers are hazardous. You then say the statistics can't be really interpreted. Can't have it both ways.

 

[wabower]

Takeoffs and landings do not involve sustained ground ops at high speed. Both takeoffs and landings involve only a brief time of high-speed ground ops, one of which quickly transitions to flight, and one which quickly transitions to a slow taxi if properly executed. As nosehair noted, the training can (and should be) incorporated into the appropriate lessons on those subjects.

Aviation textbooks compare the similar physics of taildraggers and loaded wheelbarrows. How many high-speed wheelbarrow ops have you seen?

Every takeoff and every landing involves a high-speed taxi. I can't see that practicing high-speed taxi with the instructor is any more dangerous than taking off or landing. Can any one tell me what makes the taxi so much more dangerous?

We've had taxiing accidents here, but they involved dumb stuff: Taxiing too fast downwind (good way to groundloop a taildragger) or taxiing too fast on an icy runway in a crosswind. Downwind or slippery are certainly not conditions in which a sane pilot would be doing a proper high-speed taxi run. Controllability is really compromised in such cases.

Dan

 

[wabower]

Do you make several patterns when you're demonstrating the landings, or do them in series after one approach? Haven't you been doing "landing demos" after every lesson since they started flying with you?

If you want them to learn about maintaining directional control near the ground, why don't you start with a drill that teaches them to do that? Once they master that skill, landing is easy, specially if they're not all worked up about it.

I'm beginning to think that I should consider incorporating more taxiing time into the training I give, but the bigger thing I see is that doing things the RIGHT way - law of primacy invoked here - with the instructor demonstrating first, gives the student the "feel" of what "right" is, and then, and only then, do you let them work towards correcting the "bad" situations - which always come soon enough anyway. For example, after we do airwork, I always demo a few landings, and then we go on to landing practice next. I want them to work on maintaining directional control close to the ground and straight down the runway at first, then work on touching down, and then gradually giving them complete control of the rudder on the landing. Of course we then go on to harder situations and crosswinds.

Ryan

 

[RyanShort1]

Do you make several patterns when you're demonstrating the landings, or do them in series after one approach? Haven't you been doing "landing demos" after every lesson since they started flying with you?

If you want them to learn about maintaining directional control near the ground, why don't you start with a drill that teaches them to do that? Once they master that skill, landing is easy, specially if they're not all worked up about it.

To be honest, I was talking more about endorsements than PPL... I do have one SP guy right now, and we're doing one or two low approaches / landing attempts every flight. He's doing pretty well so far.
And yes, if they don't know they are trying to do something hard, they don't get worked up about it. It's always fun to "sneak" a customer on to the runway with a "low pass" that keeps getting a little bit lower.

Ryan

 

[dmccormack]

>2 High Speed Taxi Practice = Waste of Time and Money


You'll get plenty of "high speed taxi" practice taking off and wheel landing.

My TW checkout training included exactly ONE "high speed taxi" -- it was actually an extended run down the runway at partial power. Once I figured out how to make it go straight the instructor increased power and we were flying.

 

[MBDiagMan]

You've provided good examples of like/like airplanes, but when a tandem taildragger student transisions to a 172, the learning curve is steep, what with stick/yoke throttle trim and sight picture so different.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I don't see it this way.

I started in a Champ and flew 7 hours before going to the 150. The stick to yoke for me was COMPLETELY a non issue. Changing hands for throttle was COMPLETELY a non issue. The flaps were a non issue, since the Champ had none. Sight picture didn't mean much to me either.

The only difference was that I had to concentrate so hard on rudder control in the Champ that my feet worked automatically in the 150 so it made it much easier.

When I was at about 30 hours, we went back up in the Champ and did spin training. After the extra flight hours in the 150 the Champ was refreshing to fly. A week or two later, one of my instructors other students who was really close to getting his CFI needed a spin endorsement and was about to go up in the Champ. He voiced a concern to the instructor because he had never flown anything with a stick.

The instructor asked me, in front of this guy, "is there any difference between a stick and a yoke?" I said "you'll never know the difference."

I watched them go up and spin down. When they came back in I asked the guy if the stick was any problem and he said "absolutely not."

Now that I have a good bit of time in my 140 with Johnson bar flaps, the only thing that would bother me getting into a 150 or 172 would be the silly flap switch. The handle is so much quicker, easier and more natural. It's like the emergency brake lever in many of the cars I've driven in the last 50 years.

Learning in a taildragger from the get go is sort of like learning to drive in a stick shift car. Once you can drive a stick, you can drive anything.

Doc

 

[Fearless Tower]

Now that I have a good bit of time in my 140 with Johnson bar flaps, the only thing that would bother me getting into a 150 or 172 would be the silly flap switch. The handle is so much quicker, easier and more natural. It's like the emergency brake lever in many of the cars I've driven in the last 50 years.

Just look for an early model 172...they had Johnson Bars too!

I too much prefer my manual flaps to the electrics.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Just look for an early model 172...they had Johnson Bars too!

I too much prefer my manual flaps to the electrics.

I saw my first manual flaps yesterday (I think it was the first time) when a pilot was kind enough on the Red Board to let me sit right seat in his Cherokee Warrior on the way to a Harris Ranch lunch for pilots. It was actually pretty cool and did seem "natural".

 

[metalman]

Just look for an early model 172...they had Johnson Bars too!

I too much prefer my manual flaps to the electrics.

I went from a fairly new 172 with elec flaps, to a fairly new tecnam with leccy flaps, I then had the use of a mates Cherokee six ,,first circuit I thought "what an archaic ****box", after a couple of cicuits I was sold, can't think of a better way to do flaps now, nothing is as simple or controllable, I'd put them in my RV6 except my fat ass wont fit with the lever up

 

[L.Adamson]

I went from a fairly new 172 with elec flaps, to a fairly new tecnam with leccy flaps, I then had the use of a mates Cherokee six ,,first circuit I thought "what an archaic ****box", after a couple of cicuits I was sold, can't think of a better way to do flaps now, nothing is as simple or controllable, I'd put them in my RV6 except my fat ass wont fit with the lever up

For the RV6, I do prefer the electric flap switch, right next to the throttle. Hand stays on throttle, with the ability to operate the flaps at the same time. 6's can get a bit uncomfortable when operating manual flaps.....stuffed between two people.

L.Adamson

 

[metalman]

For the RV6, I do prefer the electric flap switch, right next to the throttle. Hand stays on throttle, with the ability to operate the flaps at the same time. 6's can get a bit uncomfortable when operating manual flaps.....stuffed between two people.

L.Adamson

flown both in RV's and the elec ones are easier, only pinched my hand in the lever/button twice ,

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Forgot to say that my electric flap motor failed on the 152 Saturday. So manual flaps would have been better.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Thinking of attending this tonight:


Increasing Flight Safety through tailwheel training

Topic:

Tailwheel Flying, the transition process, and the benefits how it improves your all around flying and ADM.

Description:

1. Physical differences between tricycle gear and tailwheel aircraft and how that relates to the differences in handling the two types

2. How understanding torque becomes critical in tailwheel take-offs and landings

3. The importance of coordinated flight

4. Crosswind landings and take-offs

5. Soft field landings and take-offs

6. Wheel landings

7. How the additional skills and awareness learned in tailwheel flying transfer to tricycle gear flying

 

[RoscoeT]

Description:

2. How understanding torque becomes critical in tailwheel take-offs and landings

Be sure to correct their use of "torque", which is a fairly insignificant force to manage unless you're in a P-51. One of my peeves is substituting "torque" for what is actually spiraling slipstream, which does have a significant effect. Pure torque simply means there will be more pressure on the left tire than the right. On pavement, with proper tire pressure, it's not much of a factor. You will actually notice pure torque more on grass strips where the drag on the tires is greater, and will require more right rudder than on pavement, especially in high-powered airplanes.

What they're really referring to is spiraling slipstream off the propellor, which causes the propwash to hit the left side of the vertical fin, yawing the airplane to the left. The lower the airspeed, and the higher the power setting, the greater the effect.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Be sure to correct their use of "torque", which is a fairly insignificant force to manage unless you're in a P-51. One of my peeves is substituting "torque" for what is actually spiraling slipstream, which does have a significant effect. Pure torque simply means there will be more pressure on the left tire than the right. On pavement, with proper tire pressure, it's not much of a factor. You will actually notice pure torque more on grass strips where the drag on the tires is greater, and will require more right rudder than on pavement, especially in high-powered airplanes.

What they're really referring to is spiraling slipstream off the propellor, which causes the propwash to hit the left side of the vertical fin, yawing the airplane to the left. The lower the airspeed, and the higher the power setting, the greater the effect.

I'm not the kind of person to stand up in front of experienced pilots and correct them. Not sure if I can do this for you if I myself am not an expert. I don't like to be that person, you know? I can PM you their email address if you'd like. I am driving about 2 hours each way and would like to use this as both a learning opportunity and a networking with other pilots opportunity.

 

[Dan Thomas]

Be sure to correct their use of "torque", which is a fairly insignificant force to manage unless you're in a P-51. One of my peeves is substituting "torque" for what is actually spiraling slipstream, which does have a significant effect. Pure torque simply means there will be more pressure on the left tire than the right. On pavement, with proper tire pressure, it's not much of a factor. You will actually notice pure torque more on grass strips where the drag on the tires is greater, and will require more right rudder than on pavement, especially in high-powered airplanes.

What they're really referring to is spiraling slipstream off the propellor, which causes the propwash to hit the left side of the vertical fin, yawing the airplane to the left. The lower the airspeed, and the higher the power setting, the greater the effect.

The slipstream is only one of four forces that turn the nose left. The torque, which we see is minor in our airplanes, is another. Gyroscopic force that comes into play when we raise the tail is a third, and the fourth, which is as powerful as that spiralling slipstream, is P-factor: the downgoing blade on the RH side has a larger angle of attack than the upgoing LH blade when the airplane is in three-point attitude, and so the thrust is offset to the right, pulling the nose left.

Dan

 

[RoscoeT]

The slipstream is only one of four forces that turn the nose left. The torque, which we see is minor in our airplanes, is another. Gyroscopic force that comes into play when we raise the tail is a third, and the fourth, which is as powerful as that spiralling slipstream, is P-factor: the downgoing blade on the RH side has a larger angle of attack than the upgoing LH blade when the airplane is in three-point attitude, and so the thrust is offset to the right, pulling the nose left.

Dan

Absolutely right, but they didn't mention gyroscopics or p-factor in the description. So Kimberly - set these fools straight!

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Absolutely right, but they didn't mention gyroscopics or p-factor in the description. So Kimberly - set these fools straight!

Why don't we just let them do their two hour talk and then decide? You are basing this on a description from an FAA site for a WINGS credit. I would bet money the speaker / presenter did not even write the description.... it was the guy in charge of arranging the meeting / coordinating / etc. Usually the expert speakers just show up, speak, then leave. They give all the admin work to someone else.

 

[RoscoeT]

Why don't we just let them do their two hour talk and then decide? You are basing this on a description from an FAA site for a WINGS credit. I would bet money the speaker / presenter did not even write the description.... it was the guy in charge of arranging the meeting / coordinating / etc. Usually the expert speakers just show up, speak, then leave. They give all the admin work to someone else.

I've been mostly joking...of course, what you just said.

But some of these Wings presentations are pretty lame, depending on who does it and who put it together. Could be some old bubba reading a powerpoint presentation, or you might get lucky and have someone experienced and insightful, more conversational and relevent give a great talk without all the platitudes and cliches presented in a regurgitative manner. Worth going. Still, what we're saying is worth remembering when you go. You don't actually have to try to make the presenter look like an ass.

 

[RyanShort1]

If you REALLY want to mess with your mind... after getting your tailwheel endorsement, find a friend who owns a Tiger Moth with an original British engine...

Ryan

 

[dmccormack]

The slipstream is only one of four forces that turn the nose left. The torque, which we see is minor in our airplanes, is another. Gyroscopic force that comes into play when we raise the tail is a third, and the fourth, which is as powerful as that spiralling slipstream, is P-factor: the downgoing blade on the RH side has a larger angle of attack than the upgoing LH blade when the airplane is in three-point attitude, and so the thrust is offset to the right, pulling the nose left.

Dan

Peter Garrison mentions in this month's Flying column that there is no P factor. He says he proved this in an earlier column.

He also says there is no overbanking tendency, and questions the downwind turn danger.

Interesting!

 

[RoscoeT]

Peter Garrison mentions in this month's Flying column that there is no P factor. He says he proved this in an earlier column.

Cool, I'll have to check that out. Does he mean that the "phenomenon" doesn't exist at all, or that it's just not significant? I can certainly believe it's hardly a significant force in most airplanes.

He also says there is no overbanking tendency...

Wonder if he's ever flown a glider.

...and questions the downwind turn danger.

I hope he also cleared up that treadmill thing too.

 

[dmccormack]

Wonder if he's ever flown a glider.

Well, I sorta follow his point.

(Don't agree, necessarily...)


Does an airplane at 90 degree bank demonstrate an overbanking tendency?

No.

How about 80 degrees? 70? And so on....

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

The slipstream is only one of four forces that turn the nose left. The torque, which we see is minor in our airplanes, is another. Gyroscopic force that comes into play when we raise the tail is a third, and the fourth, which is as powerful as that spiralling slipstream, is P-factor: the downgoing blade on the RH side has a larger angle of attack than the upgoing LH blade when the airplane is in three-point attitude, and so the thrust is offset to the right, pulling the nose left.

Dan

And, unless you are driving a P51 Mustang, all that gets lost in the noise caused by ever changing crosswinds.

Keep it straight, and don't try to figure out which of the 157 things it is that caused the nose to go it's own way.

 

[yakdriver]

All this talk about torque, p-factor, spiral effect etc. It comes down to you just need to learn what you have to do to fly the airplane, it's as simple as that.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

I've been mostly joking...of course, what you just said.

But some of these Wings presentations are pretty lame, depending on who does it and who put it together. Could be some old bubba reading a powerpoint presentation, or you might get lucky and have someone experienced and insightful, more conversational and relevent give a great talk without all the platitudes and cliches presented in a regurgitative manner. Worth going. Still, what we're saying is worth remembering when you go. You don't actually have to try to make the presenter look like an ass.

I am not as good with words as you think. I might make him look like an ass, which I'd like to avoid.

 

[dmccormack]

All this talk about torque, p-factor, spiral effect etc. It comes down to you just need to learn what you have to do to fly the airplane, it's as simple as that.

Some of us like to know why the airplane is trying to head left on takeoff. Chalk it up to curiosity.

Others need to know that it's a consistent left turning tendency (not just wind effect) before adjusting for it. Chalk it up to being obstinate.

Others just need to hear MORE RIGHT RUDDER, DUMMY!!!

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Some of us like to know why the airplane is trying to head left on takeoff. Chalk it up to curiosity.

Others need to know that it's a consistent left turning tendency (not just wind effect) before adjusting for it. Chalk it up to being obstinate.

Others just need to hear MORE RIGHT RUDDER, DUMMY!!!

Yes I definitely need to hear I'm a dummy.

 

[brcase]

Well, I sorta follow his point.

(Don't agree, necessarily...)


Does an airplane at 90 degree bank demonstrate an overbanking tendency?

No.

How about 80 degrees? 70? And so on....

I think one criteria is that it has to be unaccelerated flight.

But then explain to me why in a 45 degree bank coordinated turn at 45mph** a SGS 2-33 requires full opposite aileron to maintain the 45 degree bank?
In fact the only way to get out of the bank is to lower the nose to increase speed or slip it (with the rudder) out of the turn.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

** my memory as to the exact number may be a bit off but it demonstrates the idea.

 

[dmccormack]

I think one criteria is that it has to be unaccelerated flight.

But then explain to me why in a 45 degree bank coordinated turn at 45mph** a SGS 2-33 requires full opposite aileron to maintain the 45 degree bank?
In fact the only way to get out of the bank is to lower the nose to increase speed or slip it (with the rudder) out of the turn.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

** my memory as to the exact number may be a bit off but it demonstrates the idea.

My Chief has very similar response in a steep bank.

Will the airplane continue to increase its bank or will it do something else when controls are released?

 

[Dan Thomas]

Peter Garrison mentions in this month's Flying column that there is no P factor. He says he proved this in an earlier column.

He also says there is no overbanking tendency, and questions the downwind turn danger.

Interesting!

You can take a protractor to a taildragger's propeller and figure out the AoA for yourself; the difference is there, alright, and it's also the factor that make one engine of a twin the critical engine (in a non-counterrotating setup).

He's right, though, about the downwind turn stuff. Take an airplane up in a strong, steady upper wind. Put on the hood, do a level constant turn at 30° bank or so, and see if you can feel any acceleration, deceleration, or notice any changes in airspeed as you go around. The track over the ground will not be circular but you won't feel a thing.

Dan

 

[Dan Thomas]

If you REALLY want to mess with your mind... after getting your tailwheel endorsement, find a friend who owns a Tiger Moth with an original British engine...

Ryan

Or the old Auster, like I used to own. Same Gipsy engine, just a bit bigger. Left rudder on takeoff.

Dan

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

He's right, though, about the downwind turn stuff. Take an airplane up in a strong, steady upper wind. Put on the hood, do a level constant turn at 30° bank or so, and see if you can feel any acceleration, deceleration, or notice any changes in airspeed as you go around. The track over the ground will not be circular but you won't feel a thing.

Dan

True dat.

But, at the other end, I was learning myself to fly a RC glider - launched it upwiind - started a U turn - woah, it's going too fast! Back on the stick.
I didn't realize what I had done until after it did a lawn dart - the nose penetrated the dirt several inches...
(I've never done that in a 1"=1" scale airplane)

 

[L.Adamson]

Be sure to correct their use of "torque", which is a fairly insignificant force to manage unless you're in a P-51. One of my peeves is substituting "torque" for what is actually spiraling slipstream, which does have a significant effect.

I remember when I did my first touch and go, in my RV. I slammed the throttle back in rather quickly, and thought WOW---- this thing actually has noticeable "torque", as it wanted to roll to the left.......besides requiring a lot of right rudder for the other mentioned forces. Of course the RV does have a much better power ratio than a standard Cessna 172, as well as it's short wings. And for reference, I've been in a P-51....which makes the RV tame in the torque department.

L.Adamson

 

[nosehair]

Be sure to correct their use of "torque",

Be careful with that attitude. The old FAA "Flight Training Handbook" started the Section on these four forces with the overall general term "Torque", then proceeded to explain Engine Torque, Spiraling Slipstream, P-Factor, etc., as the individual forces, but the overall term for the left turning tendency was "Torque".

Old School term, maybe, but not "incorrect". :wink2:

 

[Fearless Tower]

So...if spiralling slipstream is such a potent force.....why does a V-tail Bo need so much right rudder?

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Be careful with that attitude. The old FAA "Flight Training Handbook" started the Section on these four forces with the overall general term "Torque", then proceeded to explain Engine Torque, Spiraling Slipstream, P-Factor, etc., as the individual forces, but the overall term for the left turning tendency was "Torque".

Old School term, maybe, but not "incorrect". :wink2:

Yes. She was an older lady (60's or 70's) with over 10,000 hours, and an active tailwheel CFI. She said "torque" in her presentation and then said "four forces" so this must have been what was meant by that.

I've never seen someone so enthusiastic about flying (well except maybe me?)

She even offered a free hour of her time to all of us, to get started, and the school offered $20 per hour off their new (year 2000) model Citabria, which they keep in a hangar while the other planes sit on the ramp. Too bad they are 2 hours away from me (each way) and want me to join a club and when I went there before I sat in the back of a plane for 30-45 minutes waiting to be cleared by ATC for takeoff. Talk about wasted hobbs!!!

 

[MBDiagMan]

I'm not the kind of person to stand up in front of experienced pilots and correct them. Not sure if I can do this for you if I myself am not an expert. I don't like to be that person, you know? I can PM you their email address if you'd like. I am driving about 2 hours each way and would like to use this as both a learning opportunity and a networking with other pilots opportunity.

Don't worry, in about 10 years and 5,000 hours from now, you will command such interest and respect with people hanging on your every word.

 

[jstro]

Well, I suppose the spiraling slipstream is still torque, but it's just torque about the yaw axis

 

[Anthony]

Lot of truth in that.....the rudder in the DC-3 is so heavy that you don't jab it like you do in a little tailwheel....you simply have to anticipate. I'm still working on that one!

You mean the control surfaces on a DC-3 aren't hydraulically boosted?