Should I buy a nose wheel or tailwheel airplane?

Cluemeister said:
You could always buy a Sportsman 2 + 2 and convert it back and forth. From their website: "The Sportsman can be built as a tricycle, taildragger or floatplane. Get all three and change between configurations take only a few hours."
Click to expand...

LOL The perfect plane for the indecisive. :p
 
Isn't religion one of the topics we're not supposed to go on about on this forum?
 
Flying a tailwheel airplane isn't any different than a nose dragger. Taxiing a tailwheel plane is simple. The itty bitty space between flying and taxiing is a bit more risky but it's no big deal. It's all about gear position relative to CG. And we know many don't have a good understanding about that! Taildraggers have stol and ski advantages. Outside of that? Pfft. Who cares? Guys that beat their chests about being taildragger pilots usually aren't very good at it.
 
Lachlan said:
Post #1 says, "Asking for a friend." Does that mean you're asking me to be friends? Oh, Tom, I don't know, it's all so sudden... how's a guy supposed to know, I mean, not for nothin', but I'm already full up on friends, and even though I could make room for one more, how do I know you'll keep up your end of the bargain the next time someone else comes along? I think my dog is calling me. I gotta go...
Click to expand...
Who would want to be friends with some who thinks you are obtuse?
Get real sonny, I chose my friends a lot more careful than that.
 
How about this one for fun? For those of you, me included, that are true to conventional gear, what tricycle-gear plane would you consider owning? Please, we all want a P-38 so let's drop that. I would take a nice old Bonanza and her sister the T-34.
 
Wait, I thought we had settled on buying an airplane a page ago?..Yes, you should buy a nose wheel or a tail wheel.

What is the holdup? We want pictures.
 
My first lessons were in a Cub and Champ for those people who said they are the same as a conventional gear are mistaken.
 
Fearless Tower said:
It’s easy to pick on Tom, but what he’s saying is pretty simple: there is a reason that the universe shifted to nose-wheels.

Tailwheel buys you a little extra useful load and they are better for unimproved/backcountry strips. But that’s really it.

There really is no NEED for tailwheel. We do it because we are enthusiasts.

I own 3 radial engine taildraggers. I love them. But there are things I just won’t do with them that I wouldn’t think twice about in nosewheels. I fly nosewheels for a living. Citations, Barons, 421, Cirrus...etc. I don’t sweat a 30 kt crosswind in any of those airplanes. I wouldn’t even attempt a 30 kt x-wind landing in any of my airplanes.

If you want to fly tailwheel because you love that kind of flying, I’m all about that.

But we need to stop the BS about tailwheel being some requirement to be a ‘real pilot’
Click to expand...

Please tell us about your 3 radial engine taildraggers.
 
FloridaPilot said:
My first lessons were in a Cub and Champ for those people who said they are the same as a conventional gear are mistaken.
Click to expand...
By definition, Champs and Cubs are conventional gear.

But a Champ isn’t going to keep you honest like some more challenging taildraggers.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Waco UBF-2, Beech 18 and a T6.
Click to expand...

There you go. Three squirrely ones! Thanks for answering. One point of tailwheel flying that I have not seen in this thread is the mention of flaps. So many simple tailwheel planes teach us to slip, a skill I believe can serve any pilot well in certain situations.
 
DanWilkins said:
How about this one for fun? For those of you, me included, that are true to conventional gear, what tricycle-gear plane would you consider owning? Please, we all want a P-38 so let's drop that. I would take a nice old Bonanza and her sister the T-34.
Click to expand...
If I was stupid rich like Jeff Bezos, my personal flight department would have a DC-6, a 727 and a B-25.

If I had the business need (and revenue) to require a lot of longer distance travel, I’d be happy with a Citation Bravo.

I have previously owned a Baron and if I couldn’t afford to keep operating the Beech 18, I would probably go back to one.

I used to really want an Aero Commander AC500 or a Twin Bonanza, but the hangar cost (and maintenance cost) would have been the same as the Beech 18, so I never pursued those.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Waco UBF-2, Beech 18 and a T6.
Click to expand...

There you go. Three squirrely ones! Thanks for answering. One point of tailwheel flying that I have not seen in this thread is the mention of flaps. So many simple tailwheel planes teach us to slip, a skill I believe can serve any pilot well in certain situations.
 
DanWilkins said:
There you go. Three squirrely ones! Thanks for answering. One point of tailwheel flying that I have not seen in this thread is the mention of flaps. So many simple tailwheel planes teach us to slip, a skill I believe can serve any pilot well in certain situations.
Click to expand...
The F2 is indeed squirrelly, but I actually wouldn’t call the Beech 18 or T6 squirrelly. When you get into the heavier tailwheels, you find that they are more stable and in a way, easier to land.

The challenge/danger with the heavy tailwheel though is they are far less forgiving if you get lazy or too complacent/comfortable.
 
Daytonabch04 said:
Hey now...this is seriously what I am considering :mad:
Click to expand...

Seriously, I've heard it's one of the best flying E-ABs out there.

But if it was mine I'd probably build it in taildragger configuration, put my flyrod in the back, and fly it that way that way "forever". ;)
 
DanWilkins said:
There you go. Three squirrely ones! Thanks for answering. One point of tailwheel flying that I have not seen in this thread is the mention of flaps. So many simple tailwheel planes teach us to slip, a skill I believe can serve any pilot well in certain situations.
Click to expand...

There's absolutely nothing about a nosewheel airplane that prevents one from learning how to slip. I learned in a Cessna 150.
 
Last edited:
GRG55 said:
There's absolutely nothing about a nosewheel airplane that prevents one from learning how to slip. I learned in a Cessna 150.
Click to expand...
That just reminded me of one of the very few airplanes I've flown that I actually didn't like: Avid Magnum

That goofy thing had the rudder effectiveness of a PA28. If you tried to slip it in, it would actually PICK UP speed!
 
Stewartb said:
Who cares? Guys that beat their chests about being taildragger pilots usually aren't very good at it.
Click to expand...

Might be true. But it can also apply to a huge number of pilots and owners. The chest-pounding, I mean.

Flying an airplane is a privilege exercised by a microscopic percentage of the world's population. In the US, less than one in 500 people are active pilots at any level. Canada and Australia are similar. The numbers go down from there as we look at other countries. We are a rare breed, blessed beyond measuring. And yet, for many of us, instead of making us grateful for such an activity, it inflates our egos.
 
Fearless Tower said:
But we need to stop the BS about tailwheel being some requirement to be a ‘real pilot’
Click to expand...
Yeah, I never take people seriously who say crap like that. Who cares? Nose wheel planes are more modern and practical. I like them better simply because.....I just like them better. That's good enough reasoning for me. Doesn't make me less of a pilot. Tailwheel planes belong on a black and white VHS tape documentary about WW2.
 
Or here. :)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1385.JPG
    IMG_1385.JPG
    149.2 KB · Views: 16
  • IMG_1386.JPG
    IMG_1386.JPG
    164.3 KB · Views: 16
Stewartb said:
Flying a tailwheel airplane isn't any different than a nose dragger.
Click to expand...

Once again I get to ask, WTF is a nose dragger?

People landing in reverse? People landing on the nose gear?

Last I checked, for a tricycle gear airplane the LAST wheel on the ground is the nose gear. Or at least it should be.
 
Aren't those nose PUSHERS?

drag
/draɡ/
  1. verb pull (someone or something) along forcefully, roughly, or with difficulty.

  2. noun the action of pulling something forcefully or with difficulty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top