|
Want Taildragger Opinions
Like so many others I need help in the TD/Tri-Gear debate. I don't want to make a $60+k mistake, and I'm looking for serious TD pilots who will indulge me (I have no interest whatsoever in the 'real men fly...' issue).
My situation: 300-hour pilot with about 100 hours in TD's (low-performance Aeronca, Champ), seeking an efficient, fast, UTILITARIAN, non-retractable, serious cross-country bird for 1-2 people. After rejecting Mustang II and Pulsar-100, RV-7 or RV-7A is it. My flying would be minimal 'around-the-patch', sight-seeing, grass-strip, or dirt-strip stuff. Why I want an RV-7 (vs 7A): 1. Faster (though not much); 2. Lighter (quite a few pounds); 3. Better looking (shouldn't be important, but it is); 4. Easier access to cabin, avoiding the weight, cost, labor, drag, and ugliness of the added step hanging out; I was still about talked into a 7A until I hopped in the cabin of an RV-6A. The gear brackets and braces on the floor are an ABORTION!!! "It's okay," I was told, "your leg flexes right around it!"...holy mackeral. I was also told there are many TD pilots who will not fly their TD's in gusts/crosswinds while nose gear guys never give it a thought...I can't (not) fly that way. Given my particular situation, and potential problems with experience, insurance, re-sale, ground loops, whatever, should I just bail and go with the 7A? Kinda hard to know in advance the crosswinds on a cross-country. Sorry for the length, but I'm really, truly interested in TD pilot opinions. Thanks, Allan |
Make a list
Make a list of the pros and cons in your opinion and then add the input from this forum. The bigger number wins. I do not know if it applies in your situation but don't forget your family and what might be better for them if they get involved in the flying. Good luck.
|
Morning, Allen.
Well, this topic always brings out the passion on both sides, so what I'll try to do is talk about what *I* like about having my T/D - and I'll try to touch on things people don't usually talk about. I had absolutely zero tailwheel time before I got in Alex's RV-6 for transition training (www.RVtraining.com), so worded another way - my first landing in a tailwheel aircraft was in a RV-6 from the left seat. My transition training was also my tailwheel endorsement. I think I had about 150hrs in Cessnas at the time. So on to the topics:
Hope some of this helped. Best always, |
Allan,
The gear structure in the cockpit is a problem for me also. I think it has something to do with my short legs. Long legged people don't seem to have as much of a problem with the gear towers. As far as not flying in cross-winds, I can't imagine that being a factor of where the tailwheel is. I've been flying my -6 for 12.5 years and my decision not to fly in a cross-wind would not be any different if the tailwheel was in front. The RV series of airplanes are very tame taildraggers. That's not to say they don't handle like taildraggers, but they are very honest and easy to master. I built a -6 instead of a -6A and would make the same decision today for basically the same reasons you state. In my opinion a person that won't fly a taildragger in a crosswind or gusty conditions should not fly a tricycle under the same conditions. Mel...DAR |
Tailwheel or Nosewheel
That decision is allways a tough choice, after building and flying an RV-6 for about 450 hours I am now wrapping up a RV-9a and it was the best choice for me because....
The insurance is less expensive on a trigear (big factor for me) It is much less stressfull (read easier) to land the trigear in certain conditions like at Destin Florida where the runway is narrow, often wet and lined with airplanes, add a gusting crosswind and it just makes it that much more challenging. The only reason I would build a taildragger now is to be able to use the airfoil shaped Grove gear legs that eliminate the whipping and vague feeling when you arent sure if you are really on the ground or not :) It may not be as big of a factor on the -7s but on a -9a you can achieve a higher AOA on the TO roll by hauling back on the stick to break ground sooner for a shorter takoff than with the -9. Best of luck with your project, you will love it no matter which configuration... BTW..what canopy are you using? Tip up, my fave, or slider? Regards, Rick |
Allen,
I wasn't going to respond to this initially because I'm a relatively inexperienced taildragger pilot, but then maybe since you're in the same boat, you'll get more out of my input than you might from someone much more experienced. First off I think it is very important that you've already decided to go with a taildragger. What I mean is that no one can decide for you, you need to know what you want and why you want it. Then a forum like this can help you determine if you're on the right track. As you stated in your post, you want the taildragger and you've listed reasons x,y, and z. Your only question seems to be how well does the RV-7 handle on the ground, especially in crosswind conditions. Hopefully this is where I can help. First, my background. I've only been flying my RV-7 for 1 1/2yrs and have 230hrs on it now. I had over 2000hrs total, but absolutely no tailwheel time when I started flying it. I wanted the taildragger for only two reasons. I wanted to land on rough strips and I thought it looked a lot cooler than the "A" model. However I also had the same apprehensions that you have about crosswinds and groundloops. So I started off slow. I set my personal crosswind limits at a very conservative level. If I even so much as had a doubt, I didn't go flying. Over a period of about six months I gradually increased my comfort zone to the point where I was flying in the same wind as any average nose wheel airplane would. Let me say that this airplane is pathetically easy to takeoff/land in so far as tail draggers go. I'm almost embarrased when people say "wow, you fly a taildragger", because I know how easy it is. And it's due to one overriding thing. That gigantic vertical stab/rudder combination. You must remember that it's almost 1/3 larger than the RV-6's vert/rudder combo. When I first started landing in crosswinds of substantial magnitude, I can remember coming down on final a little nervous, then I would just simply land and say, "wow, that was nothing." It became a matter of "just fly the plane". This isn't to say that there aren't still some crosswinds that I wouldn't fly in, but the the -7's vert/rudder is just that effective. I would say Allen that with you're 100hrs of taildragger time you already have that you should have absolutely no problems with the -7. As for the comment about TD guys not flying in crosswinds that nose wheel guys don't give a thought about. I don't believe that for a minute. Just hang out with the RV bunch in the DFW area. I've seen those guys routinely fly with relatively stiff crosswinds and I'm talking about guys like Jay Pratt, Doug Reeves, Don Christiansen, Danny King, etc. And finally, don't worry about the $60k mistake. These planes are somewhat convertible as evidenced by Van's when they converted there RV-7 to an -7A after flying it as a td for a couple of years. hope this long winded reply helps, Tobin Milton FL |
Hi all,
I'm new to this forum and have been considering building a -7A (after originally considering a -9A), so my question is: does anyone have pictures of the -7A cockpit that shows the gear structure? I'd like to see how much it protrudes into the cabin area. Thanks! - ccrawford |
Overall, I have a little over 2000 hrs, about half TD time. I built an RV6 and am now building an RV8. My observations are as follows:
TDs look nicer to me. Inspection of the tail is easier during pre-flight. Maintenance on a TW is easier and cheaper than a nose wheel. Weight is less. No gear towers in the cockpit with a TD. Vision over the nose has hardly ever been a problem in the RV. Ingress & egress is easier. (Slightly) More prop clearance during taxiing and on grass/dirt strips. I think landing in the TD in a x-wind is easier, assuming you know how to do wheel landings. If you do 3 point landings, there's probably no real difference, assuming you are really TW qualified. People will say you can flip over a TD easier than a tri-gear. Probably true, but I have seen tri-gears go over on their tail, too. In a TD, you must be aware that you have to fly the plane all the way to the chocks. Taxiing a tri-gear can allow your mind to wander...maybe the TD forces you to be a better pilot. I feel more comfortable about being able to drain all moisture out of the tanks in the TW low position, which is normal for the TD. I believe the engine is easier to work on since there is no nose wheel in the way and the engine is up a little more. Stricly my opinion, but I think the TD is easier to build, based on my projects and others I have helped with. If you want to convert at a later date, check with VAN's about it before you build. On the -6 there were some differences, such as different gusset sizes in the front part of the fuselage. You would want the larger -6A gussets in that case. I don't know about the other models. I think the -As look bigger, since they are sitting up on a tri-gear. Insurance on the TD may be more, depending on your insurer and your TW time. I find the TD easy to pull around on the taxi way, using a loop of rope around the tailwheel. About the same as pulling around a tri-gear, except the TD is easier if you need to turn the tail around in a confined space. You can turn a TD around in a much tighter space than a tri-gear while taxiing. Good luck on making your decision...my advice is build what you want and don't let anyone talk you into a compromise. |
To Second some of the other comments:
I am a 400hr pilot, 150 hrs in my former, first love, Citabria...had to sell it to get the final items...sigh.... 1. Speed with economy...I had access to an 0-320 cheap so I wanted to build the slickest airframe I could. Local wisdom from those who had a 6 and built a 7a is that the nosewheel is really worth about 3-5 knots of loss, much more than Van's claims...I suspect that one the lower end of the power scale the difference might be more pronounced. Part of the problem may be the big ugly steps that seem to be required on the tricycle. 2. I am fitting a custom cowl from Sam james, and I did not want any extra complications from cutting it around a nosewheel. 3. Since my engine will be approximately 2" forward, and I will have about 3.25 inches of prop extension, I thought the tailwheel would look much cooler...longer, sleeker, etc... 4. I really do not think that it is much harder to fly a tailwheel, than it is to fly a tricycle well. Of course if you do not fly much, or are a bit more relaxed, the tricycle will help. I fly alot, when my Citabria was around, I built my hours in a little over 2 years...so I anticipate flying alot once the 7 is done. This also helps, but infrequent flyers may benefit from the tricycle gear as well. 5. Simplicity. When I looked at other builders it just seemed that when routing things like brake lines, fuel lines, etc...the tricycle gear was less clean. 6. Big open cockpit. When I have looked at both, and when I sat in both, the gear towers seemed to ruin what otherwise looked like a nice big space. I have only flown in tailwheel rv's (6) so no idea what it would be like in flight. 7. Weight. Again the big ugly steps were an issue in my mind. as well as the nose gear. 8. Off airport and rough strip work. JUST MY OPINION. I like to go to grass strips..a Citabria habbit. No matter what others say, I am just more comfortable going to a new, unfamiliar strip in a tailwheel, on the theory that if I encounter roughness, I am less likely to flip or damage the gear in a tailwheel. I do not plan bush operations...but occaisionally I go to less tha golf-course manicured strips. Similarly, If I have to put it down in a field, I would just feel more comfortable in a tailwheel. DOWNSIDE I CONSIDERED: 1. Insurance: I am building a cheap plane which brought the overall cost of insurance down, and lessened the gap to under $450 per year on the quotes I got. 2. Resale: Like primer and other things, the irrational views of the market can drive down value. But, I plan to have the plane for some time, and am building a plane that I will not need $90,000 out of in the end. 3. CG: I was afraid that because of the 0-320, and composite propr (28lbs) I would have an aft CG issue. But, I am building light, and luckily my wife weighs next to nothing. In addition, I think that spacing the engine forward, and concentrating mass in the forward areas will help alot. In the end, I just chose to go taildragger. Once you go TW....you may always enjoy it. I mst say the positive control offered by tailwheel steering, and the options I have..wheel landing, 3-point, or even the occaisional tail low fullstall, or tail low wheel landing are all tools I use in different conditions. JUST MY OPINION |
Taildragger?
I'm building an RV-8 and am a real fan of tailwheel airplanes. Remaining current is easy since I have a half share of a Pitts S-2A, a wonderful plane we've flown for 24 years. My reasons for building the 8 are: a) Slightly faster; b) Looks better - in my opinion too; c) May be a little lighter; d) I've found tailwheel aircraft more maneuverable on the ground; e) Probably tougher - we (my wife and I) hope to fly to back country strips; f) perhaps most important, TW's are more fun to TO, land and taxi in my experience. I also fly a Lance regularly but it's not as much fun. While considering RV's I met a man in Green Bay WI who was converting his RV-9A to a "9" after having a nose gear failure on a rough strip. It the little wheel fails, I don't think you'd damage engine/prop and could probably make emergency TO and Ldg if really necessary. For me that's another good reason. If you'd like to discuss, give me a call at 414-332-7897. Bill
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:27 PM. |