Training in a tail dragger

On the contrary, I think hand propping a Cub is simple and safe. Cubs and similar tandem airplanes with split or swing-up doors are easier than others like my buddy's old no-electrics Luscombe. But then he never complained about that one. You get used to what you have, I guess. With my 180 I'm pleased to have a reliable electric starter. On big tires I can't reach the controls very easily until I climb in.
 
Last edited:
Jimmy cooper said:
Now if you hand crank your car and like it then you may be a candidate for hand propping. Personally , I out grew it quickly.
Click to expand...

Well I have hand cranked my cars 1916 Model T, it starts much better than the 27 T with an electric start. If warm it would often start before you even got to the crank. An impulse coupled continental will start almost as easily. I guess only 1000 hours in these planes isn't enough to cure me of hand propping, it really is no big deal, but does require respect and with as with most things in aviation is not very tolerant of being careless. The same can be said for starting any aircraft engine, the worst starting accident I have been around was a C-182 that started at a high power setting and a unsecured pilot seat. Totaled 3 aircraft.

Start looking at hand prop accidents in almost every case the hand propping rules are not being followed, the airplane is not secured or there is not a qualified person at the controls. Follow the rules and it is at least nearly as safe as an electric start airplane.

Brian
 
Last edited:
brcase said:
...Follow the rules and it is at least nearly as safe as an electric start airplane...
Click to expand...

True, but as to my point, the "official" rules say two people and when you've just gassed up at some podunk field on a Wednesday afternoon it's very likely you might not even see another person for the rest of the day let alone get someone to throw your blade through. So obviously it's impractical or impossible to abide by those official rules.

I'm not saying it's unsafe to do it solo and, as was already mentioned, it's hardly an inconvenience at all with a Cub if you do it from behind with your left hand near the throttle but walking back and forth with a Champ or Luscombe and depending on nothing other than a pair of wheel chocks - it's not as safe or convenient as sitting inside and pulling that cable or pushing a button.

As Roscoe said, you need to have a set routine and don't ever deviate from it. You'll be okay.
 
Silvaire said:
True, but as to my point, the "official" rules say two people and when you've just gassed up at some podunk field on a Wednesday afternoon it's very likely you might not even see another person for the rest of the day let alone get someone to throw your blade through. So obviously it's impractical or impossible to abide by those official rules.

I'm not saying it's unsafe to do it solo and, as was already mentioned, it's hardly an inconvenience at all with a Cub if you do it from behind with your left hand near the throttle but walking back and forth with a Champ or Luscombe and depending on nothing other than a pair of wheel chocks - it's not as safe or convenient as sitting inside and pulling that cable or pushing a button.

As Roscoe said, you need to have a set routine and don't ever deviate from it. You'll be okay.
Click to expand...

If I have to do it by myself, I make sure the tail is tied down.
 
Silvaire said:
True, but as to my point, the "official" rules say two people and when you've just gassed up at some podunk field on a Wednesday afternoon it's very likely you might not even see another person for the rest of the day let alone get someone to throw your blade through. So obviously it's impractical or impossible to abide by those official rules.

I'm not saying it's unsafe to do it solo and, as was already mentioned, it's hardly an inconvenience at all with a Cub if you do it from behind with your left hand near the throttle but walking back and forth with a Champ or Luscombe and depending on nothing other than a pair of wheel chocks - it's not as safe or convenient as sitting inside and pulling that cable or pushing a button.

As Roscoe said, you need to have a set routine and don't ever deviate from it. You'll be okay.
Click to expand...

I didn't say you needed two people, I said two people or secured.
I prop Champs, Cubs (j3 & J4), and T-Craft from behind if impulse coupled.
Only have a couple hours in the Luscombe, I don't recall how it did from behind.

Now with non-impulse coupled often have to do it from the front to get enough momentum.

Brian
 
brcase said:
I didn't say you needed two people, I said two people or secured...
Click to expand...

Me neither Brian, just saying that the FAA policy (if that's what we want to call it) says two people and I'm not advocating that as it would be impossible to abide by 100% of the time..
 
Silvaire said:
True, but as to my point, the "official" rules say two people and when you've just gassed up at some podunk field on a Wednesday afternoon it's very likely you might not even see another person for the rest of the day let alone get someone to throw your blade through. So obviously it's impractical or impossible to abide by those official rules.

I'm not saying it's unsafe to do it solo and, as was already mentioned, it's hardly an inconvenience at all with a Cub if you do it from behind with your left hand near the throttle but walking back and forth with a Champ or Luscombe and depending on nothing other than a pair of wheel chocks - it's not as safe or convenient as sitting inside and pulling that cable or pushing a button.

As Roscoe said, you need to have a set routine and don't ever deviate from it. You'll be okay.
Click to expand...
But people DO deviate from the rules and many many accidents have occurred by people hand propping, people with many hours in them. A cub is the easiest one to hand prop. It's also a truly boring airplane. I got rid of it in 6 months. The Taylorcraft is very difficult to prop from the back end for instance. Wheel chocks are worthless if the throttle is too far open, it will jump them quickly. Have seen it happen. If you look at the faa accident reports, you quickly realize that ga pilots make terrible decisions on a daily basis so adding hand propping to say a hot engine or a very cold one , not properly tuned is asking for trouble. Years ago, After trying to start my first 65hp luscombe on a cold winter day, 30 degrees , and suffering, I never again bought an airplane with less than 85 hp and a starter. Ever tried to stop an airplane , even a 65 hp if it gets away? Very difficult, almost impossible if your alone. I watched this unfold as the airplane got away, a champ, took off, went into trees and was ruined. Pilot was high time , in a hurry, no chocks , depended on soft grass. Dumb.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
The FAA uses the word "should".
Click to expand...

Regardless it's not a "rule" anyway, just words in a handbook.

Jimmy cooper said:
... I watched this unfold as the airplane got away, a champ, took off, went into trees and was ruined....
Click to expand...

Champs seem to have a reputation as good pilotless flyers. There was one years back that got away and flew all the way up to Lake Berryessa before running out of gas.
 
Silvaire said:
Regardless it's not a "rule" anyway, just words in a handbook.



Champs seem to have a reputation as good pilotless flyers. There was one years back that got away and flew all the way up to Lake Berryessa before running out of gas.
Click to expand...

Another champ got away here in maryland not too long ago, pilot with many hours, it cut a very neat hole thru side of metal hangar and was torn up badly. Miracle it didn't hit a nearby aircraft.
 
Lots of pilots pack it in while flying in IMC - and those are often fatal. No one should get an instrument rating.
 
I want to thank everyone for the responses.
I don't think I'll be looking for a hand-propped plane. I will probably find a good Cessna 140,170, one that's IFR capable, build time and then move up to a light twin when it's time for my commercial and CFI. Maybe a travel air or 310.
I plan on scratch building a Bearhawk to haul the family around in. My kids are 7 and 8 now. Would like to have it finished prior to them entering high school.
 
Last edited:
Hey,
if you learn to fly in a tail dragger, do you then have to get a tricycle gear endorsement?
 
Pacer will take the whole fam right now. Just right for pre-teens.
 
docmirror said:
Pacer will take the whole fam right now. Just right for pre-teens.
Click to expand...

Speaking of family, at what point does a new pilot have enough experience to say okay, it's time to take the family up?
 
Staggermania said:
I want to thank everyone for the responses.
I don't think I'll be looking for a hand-propped plane. I will probably find a good Cessna 140,150,152, one that's IFR capable, build time and then move up to a light twin when it's time for my commercial and CFI. Maybe a travel air or 310.
I plan on scratch building a Bearhawk to haul the family around in. My kids are 7 and 8 now. Would like to have it finished prior to them entering high school.
Click to expand...

I hope you already started.:lol:
 
I did have one student seek me out for primary training in my Citabria.

Maybe took a tad longer, but not a real problem.

It was funny that I had to transition him to nosewheel after the checkride. You could see him tense up a bit as the nose came down after touchdown.

Anyway, perfectly doable. We remain friends about 35 years later. He now owns a Mooney and has homes in MI and FL, both with landing strips!
 
Staggermania said:
Hello Everyone!

I'm new to this site, and am planning on starting pilot training in the summer.
My question is this - I would like to learn in a tail-dragger. Is this allowed? Also, if so, then I am thinking about purchasing a tail-dragger to receive my instruction in. Any opinions on a suitable and relatively inexpensive aircraft? I've been looking at Cessna 140's and 170's.

Thanks
Brett
Click to expand...


I took flying lessons, solo'd and did about 40 hours in 1992 without finishing up before life caught up with me.

In 2011 I bought the Cessna 140 in my Moniker, hired an instructor and went for it. I had my private checkride December 21st of that year (on my late Fathers 90the birthday) and the 140 and I have been boring a hole in the sky ever since.

If you have yet to take any lessons, and you want to fly a taildragger, I have been told that you will save hours starting out in a taildragger rather than getting too settled into a tricycle before moving to the tailwheel. I believe that because in 1992 I started in an Aeronca Champ, and was very close to being ready to solo in it before my instructor made the decision that he was not going to buy insurance for student solo's in his Champ.

I then went to a 150 and solo'd in another five hours or so.

When starting again in 2011, I flew two or three hours in a 150 and solo'd again before buying my 140 and virtually starting from scratch. It took me a LONG time in the tailwheel to retrain my feet.

If you have your eye on a 140 or 170 to learn in, just do it and you will never look back. They are both wonderful aircraft with lots of parts availability and A&P/IA savvy to support them.

I wanted a 170 to have the hauling capability, but the added intial cost and added fuel cost made the decision for me. If you can afford a 170 and the added maintenance and fuel costs, go for it. If you need to economize finding a good 120/140 might be the ticket.

If you go the 120/140 route, you might want to know that in the 1948 model year, they moved the main wheels 3 inches forward. This is not a big deal for a veteran tailwheel pilot, but it makes it quicker to learn how to use your feet on the runway.

If you have any questions at all about the 120/140 breed or about my buying and training in one, please feel free to send me a private message. I would be happy to answer any questions you might have by phone if you like. It might be helpful for you since I've been down the very road you are talking about.

To your basic question, yes, learning in a tailwheel airplane makes perfect sense. Don't miss out on the experience.
 
Staggermania said:
Holy Smokes!
Thanks for all the input everyone! I wasn't expecting so many replies so quickly. I am thinking that the 140 might be the way to go for now. I like the 170, but they seem to be a little more expensive than the 140. Although perhaps I'll just wait until January to start my training, as that will be when EAA will be delivering the J-3 sweepstakes plane that I plan on winning.:)
I would like to fly a plane with a stick, rather than a yoke, but at this point, you know what they say, beggars can't be choosers. I'd like to be around 20-25k.
Click to expand...

That budget will get you a really top notch 140. I plan 5.6 gallons per hour, but mine has been STC's with a larger engine. An 85HP version which is more common would use a little less fuel.

As I said before, I started in a Champ with a stick. When I moved to the 140 I never knew the difference. With a stick you usually fly with your right hand and throttle with your left. A yoke is the opposite, at least the ones I have seen. I enjoy flying a stick more than a yoke, but for traveling the yoke works better for me because it frees my right hand for messing with radios, switches and such. About all I use my left hand on is the altimeter and directional gyro(not all 140's have a directional gyro.)

There is a great 120-140 club. I attended their national fly in last October and look forward to their national flyin in late September. You don't have to join to post on their forum. It is a GREAT source of information and camaraderie surrounding this wonderful little airplane.
 
Tom-D said:
A decent 170 is $40 grand to start. some rag wings in the 20's but the cheap ones are the ones are the ones you can't afford.
Click to expand...


Don't be afraid of a ragwing. Modern synthetic material is good for decades if kept hangared.

Not ALL inexpensive airplanes are clapped out jalopies. There are a number of people in the 120-140 club with outstanding aircraft, that are getting older, losing their medical and so forth.

Don't shoot all the dogs because one of them has fleas.
 
Tom-D said:
The 140 market is at the top of the heap. they actually bring a better prices than the average 170. simply because most have already been restored and polished, and command $35-45K.

You'd do well watching the market to find a 48/170 rag wing that is in great condition at 25-30K, but be careful they do not have the instrument panel space to incorporate many radios so having the gear to pass the PPL practical.

OBTW I have owned 4 of them. IMHO the 48 is the best of the bunch. they will land anywhere a "B" will and get out of any where they land. the "B" won't.
Click to expand...


Not all 140 or 170 panels fall short.
 

Attachments

  • C140Panel.jpg
    C140Panel.jpg
    94.3 KB · Views: 13
Tom-D said:
If a champ won't do it, why will a 140 do it? the equipment is the same. just because the 140 has an electric system doesn't mean the equipment required is installed. many are basically VFR equipped.
Click to expand...


Hmmm...... I think you need to look on a recent thread on the 120-140 club forum entitled "Show Me Your Panels."

Due to weather we didn't have very many planes at the nationals last September. Around fifty I believe. There were VERY few if any that would not have had enough panel for the Private training and checkride. Panels and aircraft often get upgraded over the years you know.:)
 
Tom-D said:
You do not have room in the 120/140 instrument panel to do that. I have never seen any 120/140 with a 6 pac. and very few with nav gear.

One must be real world, these aircraft are becoming collector items and the more pristine the better.
Click to expand...


Again, I would ask you to view the recent thread at the 120-140 forum before making blanket statements.:)
 
Stewartb said:
Anyone looking to acquire an airplane in the $20-25K range needs to focus on condition more than type. Buy the best airplane that you can afford. Spending more on a better plane is more cost effective than spending less and trying to make a plane better.

Yoke vs stick? I've had both. They do the same thing, which is to allow me to control the airplane. No advantage or disadvantage either way. A bigger factor might be heel brakes vs toe brakes. Or how some small tandem taildraggers are easier to get in and out of than others. Try some on and find out what fits.
Click to expand...


Agreed! The three most important criteria for purchasing used airplane, or car for that matter are:

1. condition
2. Condition
3. CONDITION

That said there are lots and lots of 120/140's and 170's to choose from.
 
Silvaire said:
In that case a Champ is probably your best bet because they are relative bargains. I found my '58 7EC parked at the end of an airport in the desert forlorn and nearly forgotten and got it for next to nothing. A bit of elbow grease and an oil change brought it back to life which was over five years and 700 trouble free hours ago.

The 7AC's are a bit more currently due to being Sport Pilot eligible but that will change if the 3rd class medical reform goes through so I'd say look for a 7EC - 90 hp and full electrical system. Hand propping is nostalgic but kind of a PITA if you travel around. It's hard to find anyone to swing your prop because people are so scared to death of everything nowadays.

I put a radio, transponder and GPS in mine and have taken it everywhere. So long as you aren't in a hurry, took me 17 hours round trip to fly to my brother's place in Utah :D

champ_grass.jpg


DSCN1223.JPG
Click to expand...


I'm sure that the market has not been static since I bought my 140 in 2011, but if I could have found a Champ in equal condition as my 140 and fit for all tasks of my checkride for the same price, I would have jumped on it like a duck on a Junebug. Mainly because it could get in and out of my pasture. At that time a good Champ cost considerably more than a good 140.
 
MBDiagMan said:
Don't be afraid of a ragwing. Modern synthetic material is good for decades if kept hangared.

Not ALL inexpensive airplanes are clapped out jalopies. There are a number of people in the 120-140 club with outstanding aircraft, that are getting older, losing their medical and so forth.

Don't shoot all the dogs because one of them has fleas.
Click to expand...

If you have a good plane you can sell it at a price representative of a good plane regardless your medical state. The real cheap ones typically need a recover and an engine.
 
Henning said:
I would not have a primary airplane I had to hand prop mostly because no plane I have to hand prop has the performance and load capacity that I require. There are plenty of ways to make hand propping safe, but none of them make it any less of a PITA.:lol:

The 1340 Stearman had no electrical system, hand propping that was a huge PITA.
Click to expand...

Yea I hear ya! Hand propping those R-2800's was a PITA as well. :rolleyes:
 
RotorAndWing said:
Yea I hear ya! Hand propping those R-2800's was a PITA as well. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Old Louie used to talk about a three man whip to prop up one during the war.

The 1340 wasn't really bad. We barely used the plane, it was a 3 generation operator, and that was grandpa's old plane they kept around for reserve. When you needed the plane, gramps would get in it and get it all primed and set as you slowly pulled through 4 blades, and normally it would fire in 2-3 pulls, then you swap with gramps.
 
Henning said:
Old Louie used to talk about a three man whip to prop up one during the war.

The 1340 wasn't really bad. We barely used the plane, it was a 3 generation operator, and that was grandpa's old plane they kept around for reserve. When you needed the plane, gramps would get in it and get it all primed and set as you slowly pulled through 4 blades, and normally it would fire in 2-3 pulls, then you swap with gramps.
Click to expand...

Guess grandpa was too cheap to put a hand crank inertial starter on?
 
Henning said:
If you have a good plane you can sell it at a price representative of a good plane regardless your medical state. The real cheap ones typically need a recover and an engine.
Click to expand...


Yes, but following the 140 community and 140 prices for a few years now, it appears that there is less demand as the older fellows step away from them.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
.............. A cub is the easiest one to hand prop. It's also a truly boring airplane. I got rid of it in 6 months. The Taylorcraft is very difficult to prop from the back end for instance. ............
Click to expand...
Why would you say the Taylorcraft is difficult to prop from behind? The right side door swings over the wing struts and folds right up against the boot cowl (at least it would if it wasn't for that venturi), standing just ahead of the landing gear you can easily swing the prop with your right hand while reaching both the throttle and mag switch with your left without moving your stance. Once it's running you just step up on the tire and from ahead of the wing strut you reach up, grab one of those tubes behind the windshield and climb in...you're always within easy reach of both the throttle and the mag switch.
The problem comes with carrying a non'pilot passenger. Unless you're willing to fly it from the right side (and there's only brakes on the left in this early model) you either have to seat the passenger in the right seat, start the engine and then walk out wide and around to get in the left side yourself or else start it and climb in and then have the passenger climb in behind you. Back when I was young and limber if I was giving a ride to a child that was so young I didn't trust them to follow simple instructions I'd seat 'em first, start the engine and then climb in over the top of 'em :wink2:, now I'm 67 y/o and some days it's about all I can do just to drag my old arthritic bones into the airplane even without climbing over some kid in the right seat. Gettin' old ain't no fun :(, it'd be real nice to have a starter :)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0001_12.jpg
    IMG_0001_12.jpg
    202.8 KB · Views: 10
Last edited:
Jimmy cooper said:
A cub is the easiest one to hand prop. It's also a truly boring airplane. I got rid of it in 6 months.
Click to expand...

You tend to speak as if your opinion is unequivocal and universal fact. Yep, Cubs aren't for everyone. But since the J-3 is the highest valued, with the largest fanbase of any aircraft in its class (WWII era 2-seat taildragger), I'd say you speak for yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top