Tailwheel trainer

brien23

brien23

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,496
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name
Display name:
Brien
Seems like a good trainer to avoid ground loop.
Screenshot 2024-12-08 at 14-36-17 Tailwheel Trainer Go-Cart To Avoid Wrecked Planes Hackaday.png
 
I liked the idea at first, but the more I've thought about it, the more I really don't think that this is the right answer. It might be better with some relatively large mods, but I'm going to keep those mods in my head and off my keyboard for now.
 
I really like the idea but agree it probably needs to be tweaked a bit to simulate the airplane that the pilot is training for.
He obviously designed it to simulate the Kitfox he is familiar with. I don't have much time in newer kitfox's with big tires. Most of my Kitfox time is a pretty much stock Kitfox II.

The part I sort of have an issue with is the use of brakes. But am willing to concede this is likely due to the kinds of airplanes I fly.
I have 1000's of ours a many different tailwheel airplanes (over 50 types) I have only found one (Cessna Bird Dog) that I thought required any brakes at all and I need more time or instruction in it to determine if that is the case or just the way the pilot I was flying it with thought it was needed to be landed.

Typically the planes I fly (Cub, champs, Citabria's mostly, but some experimental RV's, Kitfox, GlassStar, Highlanders, also) and teach in don't have much brakes to begin with or don't need them and I find pilots are usually already in trouble if they need to use brakes for directional control. I have seen several Champs upside down after having the brakes upgraded. I suspect this is because pilots don't expect champ brakes to actually be effective enough to cause an issue. As a result I am very adamant about stay off the brakes in Champs with upgraded brakes, until you have the direction under control with just the rudder.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 
Silly idea. For cripe's sake just get in the airplane and learn how to handle it rather than waste time on a contraption like that.
 
Silvaire said:
Silly idea. For cripe's sake just get in the airplane and learn how to handle it rather than waste time on a contraption like that.
Click to expand...
The airport I use has 1 or 2 aircraft ground loop a year with major damage, anything that might help reduce that should be a good thing.
 
Last edited:
brien23 said:
The airport I use has 1 or 2 aircraft ground loop a year with major damage, anything that might help reduce that should be a good thing.
Click to expand...
I have serious doubts that this thing would reduce ground loop accidents.

Watch videos of ground loops…the ailerons are always the wrong way. This thing doesn’t have ailerons. It just gets worse from there.
 
Last edited:
No flight controls, no weathervaning tendencies, no P-factor, in other words, nothing that actually causes ground loops. Granted this device will want to swap ends if the tailwheel gets outside the mains, but that is about it.
 
midwestpa24 said:
No flight controls, no weathervaning tendencies, no P-factor, in other words, nothing that actually causes ground loops. Granted this device will want to swap ends if the tailwheel gets outside the mains, but that is about it.
Click to expand...
And very poor visual references.
 
Interesting idea, but likely ineffective for many of the reasons stated. And there's the possibility of negative transfer. Other than reinforcing the idea of the "shopping cart" example, there's not much to be gained from this in my opinion.

Many, many moons ago when I taught in helicopters, a fellow instructor was teaching a student when a hover-autorotation accident occured. This resulted in damage to the helicopter's undercarriage. The flight school owner didn't fly helicopters, but nonetheless designed (on paper) a contraption which used a seat, counterweights, pulleys, and a collective-like lever to "simulate" the mechanical inputs necessary to manage the hover auto. He pitched the idea to the flight instructors, myself included, none of which thought any good could come from it, and the idea was ultimately abandoned.

There's good training, and there's bad training. There's not a lot of "okay" training. Things that fall into the gray area (maybe this tailwheel "trainer" idea) will generally move the needle in the wrong direction in the big picture. Just my opinion after a lifetime of doing this stuff.
 
The Breese Penguin was developed in response to a U. S. Army request for a beginning trainer in the French style. It contained a full set of controls but due to a low-powered engine (a Lawrance Model A of 28 hp) and very small wing it was incapable of flight. Students at this level concentrated on learning to maneuver the airplane on the ground. Penguin pilots would learn to taxi the plane, gradually increasing the speed until they could move quickly from one end of the airfield to the other while maintaining full control. At that point, they were ready to move to an airplane with more power and larger wing that was capable of lifting off the ground for a brief period.penguin-6.jpg
 
Making it top heavy and a bit wobbly may help too.
 
I’m thinking pushing a roll aboard (rather than pulling it) down the aisle of an airliner is prolly as effective. Food for thought.
 
Why should they learn to use their feet?

Next thing you know they'll have to learn to step on the ball.
 
Mooney Fan said:
Why should they learn to use their feet?

Next thing you know they'll have to learn to step on the ball.
Click to expand...

Oh the look on a pilots face when they realize the pedals do more than just steer on the ground.
 
midwestpa24 said:
No flight controls, no weathervaning tendencies, no P-factor, in other words, nothing that actually causes ground loops. Granted this device will want to swap ends if the tailwheel gets outside the mains, but that is about it.
Click to expand...
Version 1. Suggest you send him these suggestions for a V2.

Fun little thing. Cheaper than an airplane to operate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top