Taildraggers - are they better on soft ground?

[Guest burbles1]

I've thought about a tailwheel endo for a little while (but navs first), and wondered whether they are safer or more controllable for soft field work. I guess that you wouldn't have the problem of a nosewheel getting caught and flipping an aircraft over.

 

 

[poteroo]

It's a question of how soft. Yes, a t/w will help because you have the CG further rearward when taxiing - but it still needs lots of [ATTACH]12879.vB[/ATTACH]backstick to hold the tail down. Doing this gives your tailplane a real bath of mud as well. If you do dig the mainwheels in with a t/w - you'll go 'a-over-t' spectacularly. 3 pointers with power on and full flap are the safest - wheelers not recommended. MAF do it well around PNG, Irian Jaya and other wild parts of the world.

 

happy days,

 

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Burbles, By soft ground do you mean sand or general unprepared areas ?. I can think of several areas where you are much better off with a taildragger, than a nose wheel equipped aircraft. A Savannah or similiar nosewheel equipped aircraft with tundra tires, I would include with tail draggers, as far as capability goes, as they have similiar approach speeds, landing attitudes, and the elevator authority at low speed to hold the nosewheel off the ground until the last moment.

 

I have rescued a couple of nose wheeled aircraft from beaches, after the nose wheel has dug in on contact.

 

I have landed tail-wheeled aircraft sucessfully and saftely, where I would not attempt it with a nosewheel aircraft (except Savannah).

 

With a taildragger (especially with flaps) you can slow the aircraft more, it is more stable at slow speed, and you can carry a higher angle of attack (AOA) to touchdown, which then allows you to brake sooner, and pull up quicker and shorter.

 

The main advantage I feel, is the ability of the tailwheel aircraft to carry the high angle of attack safetly at low speed, ensuring a slower and shorter touchdown. On landing the wing is also way above stall angle and is then just acting as a big drag brake to pull you up...and no floating as it's done flying .

 

Additionally I don't really like good brakes on taildraggers, except for the Slepcev Storch, where they are a must for directional control right after landing, because of the rediculous low landing speeds,(especially on pavement ). The Storch by the way, is unique in that the main gear is about 1 foot further foward than normal (by design). This makes the tail very heavy, so that full braking can be used as soon as all wheels are on the ground for super-short pull up, without the risk of nosing over. And the Storch does have good brakes !.

 

Chances are if you have real good brakes on a normal taildragger, you'll forget one day and on it's nose it'll go, with the associated expense that goes with that !. If you touchdown at the correct speed you'll should only need medium braking anyway.

 

When I'm asked about landing on sand, I always say it's the same approach as if you were landing in long grass, slow as possible and stick all the way back on touchdown. Also would be the same as ditching into water, although there you may try dragging the tail into the water just prior to the mains contacting the water, in the best case scenero..............................................maj...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[kaz3g]

As Poteroo says...

 

However, a TW endorsement will likely improve your stick and rudder technique and give you the opportunity to experience some really good short-field flying as well.

 

Many traditional GA TW aircraft were designed to provide STOL performance -- Cubs, Bird Dogs, Austers, Maules, Beavers -- and a lot of RA TW aircraft have similar (sometimes better) performance again. For this reason, they are also generally better on rough landing surfaces.

 

It's interesting Poteroo mentions the MAF's PNG practices because, as I type this, a MAF C206 with full load of px plus freight has taken off from its base at YCEM and is heading for Rocky to assist people up there. I had a brief chat with the pilot Andrew before he left and his major concern was the availability of fuel at places open for operations as his endurance is only 3 hours fully loaded.

 

I hope those responsible for State and local government decision-making around the country have reflected during the last few weeks on the importance of adequate aviation facilities in times of emergencies.

 

Kaz

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Really good point there re: adequet airport facilities in emergencies...............................................................Maj...

 

 

[poteroo]

[ATTACH]12886.vB[/ATTACH]

 

On these strips we left full flap extended to taxy,(C185's), as it helped to keep some weight off the wheels. We also used lower pressures in the 800 tyres - about 15-18 psi if I remember correctly. Due to the heavy loadings - it was usual to have the CG well aft, making it less likely you'd noseover. Braking was near useless - so aerodynamic 'braking' is the essential.

 

happy days,

 

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Yes that strip looks like an interesting challange poteroo..............................................................................Maj...