Prang at Starke Field

[alf jessup]

At the end of the day it is a machine and we control it

 

We are the weakest link and we are the ones that break them by our own hands

 

Bit like a golf club, it will never hit a ball without a human input

 

A nose wheel will only break by a ham fisted controller

 

 

[SSCBD]

I flew a Zenith 701 (High Wing) from home here, over a 10 year period! The nose wheel assembly on the 701 is very robust compared to a lot of other LSA`s but I always put it down on the main wheels first, only allowing the nose wheel to touch the ground when the speed was low enough.I wouldn`t want to have to put a Low wing, tricycle undercarriage, LSA, down onto a rough paddock somewhere, due to an engine failure.

 

Frank.

Hi Frank

You getting soft and are spoilt flying the tail dragger over those lovely soft cane fields or beach.

 

Where is the sporting spirit you have and have shown! (smile) - not wanting to put a nose wheel down on paddock. You of all people, with the experience of a air god, you could do it in your sleep. I expect you to be held to a much higher standard than us poor (undertrained, unprepared ) and average RAA pilots.

 

You old bold bast...

 

Best

 

SSCBD

 

 

[aro]

And yet the NTSB did an analysis that found that "the nose gear strut had sufficient strength to perform its intended function."

And yet they regularly end up on their back in the middle of a runway after what should have been a routine landing.

 

Or even on their nose during takeoff. Is it just that nose wheel RV pilots are a group of particularly bad pilots? That seems to be the suggestion.

 

I don't actually think it is nose gear strength, I think it is the geometry.

 

From what I can see, the whole gear leg is supposed to act like a spring and flex upwards to absorb bumps. However, the upward arc also requires the leg to move forwards. That's fine for undulating bumps, but if you hit a large enough bump with a sharp enough edge the wheel can't move forwards to roll up and over.

 

Imagine a ramp sloped so that it is at 90 degrees to the angle of the front gear leg. Put it in front of the aircraft so it touches the front tyre. The small wheel and steep angle of the leg means that the contact point will not be very high up on the wheel.

 

Any bump that contacts the wheel below that point is OK, the leg can flex so the wheel rolls up and over.

 

The force from a bump that contacts the wheel at that point will act IN LINE with the gear leg. The leg can't be a spring in that case, it is just a steel rod in compression. All bump absorption must happen in the part of the leg that bends for the wheel attachment - where the first failure is occurring. This will create a bending force in the leg that will try to curl it backwards.

 

A bump higher on the wheel is even worse - the net force acting on the leg is backwards.

 

What is required is a spring that can absorb the bump without requiring forward movement of the wheel. Almost anything would probably do - look at Jabiru nosegear for an example. Have a look around at other aircraft. How many have nose gear where bump absorption requires forward travel of the wheel? Most have gear where the wheel travels straight upwards or even backwards when going over a bump. A flatter leg angle e.g. RV-10 also helps, because it means less forward travel for the same vertical travel.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

The RV is designed to be a tail dragger. Just look at a tail wheel RV next to nose wheel one! Ain't they pretty!

 

The RV is a beautiful, relatively cheap aircraft. The nose wheel is not designed to handle the abuse handed out to Cessna 172s and Warriors by their pilots. Just go and watch them landing at your nearest airport. These aircraft can take the abuse and the pilot thinks he can fly because he hasn't broken the plane. If one of these pilots buys an RV he may buy a nose wheel one because he may not be good enough to fly tail wheel. The result is an increase in broken nose wheels. Well, that's my theory anyway!

 

 

[turboplanner]

The RV is designed to be a tail dragger. Just look at a tail wheel RV next to nose wheel one! Ain't they pretty!The RV is a beautiful, relatively cheap aircraft. The nose wheel is not designed to handle the abuse handed out to Cessna 172s and Warriors by their pilots. Just go and watch them landing at your nearest airport. These aircraft can take the abuse and the pilot thinks he can fly because he hasn't broken the plane. If one of these pilots buys an RV he may buy a nose wheel one because he may not be good enough to fly tail wheel. The result is an increase in broken nose wheels. Well, that's my theory anyway!

It's all very well to bag C172 and Warrior pilots, but they aren't the ones snapping nose wheels off.

Those aircraft had millions more dollars poured into fine tuning the designs, and there's a lot more strength in the frames than lighter hand-fabricated aircraft.

 

In GA the more prevalent training is to land on the mains, and FLY the nosewheel on, not drop it by gravity, so the stick will be progressively coming back.

 

There's a surprising volume of trainers in RA who teach point and shoot, where the throttle and elevator functions are reversed, and with the nose pointing down at the runway, the slightest mistake on round out point can see the nose wheel slamming into the ground. Last time I looked at the monthly reports they averaged 1 or 2 per month with, if lucky, the aircraft tipping up on two wheels and one wing tip as it veered off the runway.

 

Equally important is the currency of the pilot; every one of us gets a lot more rusty than we think we do once flying drops below a couple of hours per week.

 

 

[storchy neil]

One instructor and I had this discussion of landing and he showed me landing on a grass strip the nose wheel did not at any time touch the ground until back at the hangar

 

He kept the nose wheel in the air useing power as if it was a tail dragger it's a balancing act that did come in handy when I took the nose wheel of when I hit power wires

 

Also by taxieing with the nose wheel off the ground makes you use the rudder same as tail dragger with no independent brakes Neil

 

 

[aj_richo]

I dont have differential brakes to steer my taildragger.. tailwheel only

 

 

[facthunter]

You teach students to keep the weight OFF the nosewheel at all times. Especially with Jabiru's but it applies to all. Touching down too fast is the prime cause. Some aircraft with a lot of weight on the nosewheel exhibit a concerning amount of directional instability. More with landing phase but not limited to.. NO nosewheel can take the loads that can easily be imposed on them with wrong handling or a bounce not handled properly.

 

When tricycle U/C's became not just common but almost universal in the 60's the number of overturns/ excursions off the runway was astounding to me. WE still stalled the plane just before touchdown with a very positive hold off till the stall warning sounded being considered desired and directional lack of control problems never reared it's head. The way some nosewheel steering works can help cause the structural concerns and control difficulties by imposing unintended side loads if rudder is still applied.

 

As Turbo says and it's only rarely brought up, you LOWER the nose after landing not let it flop down uncontrolled. The up force on the main gear will tip the plane forward if the descent rate is not arrested, same as it does exactly the opposite with a taildragger and throws you into the air, and pitches the plane UP at the same time. Nev

 

 

[storchy neil]

sorry wally aircraft flysynthesis storch S 80hp I did this after being shown by xxxxxx instructor rudder aurthority on this plane very active plus full flying tail feathers makes it possible been done neil

 

 

[frank marriott]

Especially with Jabiru'

Nev

 

Can you expand on that opinion.

 

I agree with your comment in general but just wonder what you are referring to with this bit?

 

 

[storchy neil]

wally yes mine was the first storch s in aust up at emerald qld had it sitting in the air with 25 knots indercated two on board perving on swimmers at the dam neil

 

 

[derekliston]

As most of the readers would know I folded the nosewheel back on my CH701, it was on a bitumen runway and so it just skidded a bit and didn't turn over. Although I am a low time pilot it was still a stupid mistake that I shouldn't have made. basically, instead of putting on power when I ran into sink, I pulled back on the elevator. Result, a year of work which I really didn't need! I hope I now have that sorted with a lot more landings in this aeroplane under my belt. Just incidentally also, that was two in a week of RV rollovers, there was also one at Gatton Airpark. Just my opinion but I don't like castoring nosewheels!

 

 

[storchy neil]

frank I have a feeling that facthunter may have observed that jab pilots seem to plonk the nose wheel on very quickly to my observation as if the rudder loses its authority on landing almost a three pointer neil

 

 

[facthunter]

Frank , It's a pretty much accepted thing that they are easier to control when the weight is kept off the nosewheel. I thought all instructors on Jabiru's emphasised it. Might be the rearward location of the mainwheels and small wheels generally but students having difficulties with steering it on take off do better with the stick back on initial take off roll and of course land on the mains unless you want a problem. Nev

 

 

[facthunter]

Wal, I swore when they first came out I wouldn't fly one. They were evaluated by the CASA or whatever they called it back then (early 90s). They don't have an excess of control authority, BUT when the time came I did fly them as an instructor( LSA 55 I'm referring to. Later types are easier) If a student handles one well, He /She will fly most planes OK. Bulldozer drivers need to modify their techniques. Over controlling is a no no. Understand the plane and you can really enjoy it. The early ones has a feeble nosewheel set up. Modified way back...Nev

 

 

[facthunter]

Airframe-wise, structurally. You probably won't get anything more reliable. and they don't have any "spin" vices. The "engine" thing has been overcooked, by the sheeples. Any warbird will have a less reliable engine and I'd fly an Anzani powered Bleriot or a Gnome et Rhone Sopwith given the chance without blinking an eye. Have you tried a two stroke powered Drifter? If your motor isn't 100% reliable (and what is) fly it accordingly. Nev

 

 

[frank marriott]

Frank , It's a pretty much accepted thing that they are easier to control when the weight is kept off the nosewheel. I thought all instructors on Jabiru's emphasised it. Might be the rearward location of the mainwheels and small wheels generally but students having difficulties with steering it on take off do better with the stick back on initial take off roll and of course land on the mains unless you want a problem. Nev

No worries, just wondered what you were referring to, I treat them the same as any other small tricycle (done 1000hrs on a 230 but next to nothing in any other ultralight aircraft). Certainly agree with the principle, applies to Cessnas, Pipers etc as well IMO. Yes can get a bit twitchy if the nose is left on the ground too long but I just put that down to the close couple between the mains and nose together with take off and landing speeds being higher then a lot of the slower ultralights.

 

I remember similar characteristics in Mooney (M20F) in wich one person managed to take out runway lights on take off.

 

 

[facthunter]

A 230 Is pretty "normal". I can't see most having any particular difficulty with one. Nev.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Frank , It's a pretty much accepted thing that they are easier to control when the weight is kept off the nosewheel. I thought all instructors on Jabiru's emphasised it. Might be the rearward location of the mainwheels and small wheels generally but students having difficulties with steering it on take off do better with the stick back on initial take off roll and of course land on the mains unless you want a problem. Nev

I think the very short wheelbase and perhaps castor are responsible to a degree, but I see them being landed flat all the time, in which case a bit of Russian Roulette kicks in.

 

 

[Oscar]

Frank , It's a pretty much accepted thing that they are easier to control when the weight is kept off the nosewheel. I thought all instructors on Jabiru's emphasised it. Might be the rearward location of the mainwheels and small wheels generally but students having difficulties with steering it on take off do better with the stick back on initial take off roll and of course land on the mains unless you want a problem. Nev

Nev, the mains on the LSA55 are about as far forward as it's prudent to have them with a full tank in the back. I can vouch for the fact that even without a tank in, they are very easy to raise the nosewheel off the ground with maybe 20 -25 lbs down force on the tailcone just ahead of the fin, I have to move mine in a tight workshop quite frequently using this technique..

 

The LSA55 is a bit marginal in both rudder and elevator control; Rod wanted them compact ( and road-trailerable, which they are), and in fact it is lack of elevator authority that is the limiting factor on MTOW - due to stall-speed - not structural requirement. I know the bloke who did the certification performance testing on the LSA55, and he found that the best technique for short landings was second-stage flap down to about the last five feet off the ground, then dump to first-stage flap -smartly but under control!!- which moves the c/p on the wings forward and lets you keep the nose high and removes a bit of the downwash effect from the wings that makes the rudder less effective. When mains settled, dump all flap. Old Glider Tuggies trick, and you can't do that very promptly with electric flaps...

 

Get all of that co-ordinated and he says you can land an LSA55 pretty short under good control - not STOL performance, for sure - but not an unguided air-to-ground missile. However, as you have pointed out in relation to ALL aircraft - it's knowing the best technique and being competent to use it, that's the key.

 

 

[facthunter]

Working one control against the other seems to be the main problem. Uncoordinated. Flying faster might seem the answer for some . but it can lead to bad habits. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

Wasn't it flying faster that started all this?