14 or 14A

[rvbuilder2002]

Originally Posted by tjo

The benefits of a nose wheel
1) inherently directionally stable when landing
2) better visibility while taxing
3) initial insurance is cheaper
4) ... that's about it ...

And assuming both pilots skill levels are equal, the nose wheel can takeoff and land a little shorter

[rvbuilder2002]

Originally Posted by Jake14

question for Scott:

I'm happy with my A model, but just wondering....If someone wanted to change a -14 to a -14A (or vice-versa) what would the process entail?

It has been done with the 6,7, and 9 so it could be done with the 14 as well.
Changing from tail wheel to -A model would probably be slightly easier with one exception. If they were not installed during the fuselage build, installing the boarding step brackets would be nearly impossible.

[Robert Sailor]

Originally Posted by N941WR

32 knots is my maximum demonstrated crosswind I. My -9. After that, it runs our of rudder.

I do not fear the crosswind.


Well put!

Yikes!!! 32 knots direct cross wind in an RV?
I'm not s sh#t disturber but I'm going to have to call you on that. I have flown over 10,000 hours in many different light aircraft with a couple of thousand hours in tail wheel and I don't know of a light aircraft that can handle a 32 knot cross wind.

[Mikeandmaz]

If you?re already the older side of 50, like me, you?ll find the A easier to get into. I was set on a TW but after a visit to Vans factory and trying both for size the ease of entry sold the A for me. Still wish I was a lot under 50 tho!

[DeeCee 57]

Scott

the nose wheel can takeoff and land a little shorter

Whilst the land shorter has been beaten to death in different threads (and most of my nosey wheel friends don?t even venture on grass for fear of ripping the front end off ) and I could but won?t engage in a debate over this, I wonder how a whatever A model would take-off any shorter than a non-A?

[Robert Sailor]

Originally Posted by DeeCee 57

Scott
Whilst the land shorter has been beaten to death in different threads (and most of my nosey wheel friends don?t even venture on grass for fear of ripping the front end off ) and I could but won?t engage in a debate over this, I wonder how a whatever A model would take-off any shorter than a non-A?

It's the higher angle of attack that you can get on the trike gear compared to the tailwheel version. If you check out the new Carbon Cub which is now offered in trike gear youll read or hear on utube that it will also out perform the tailwheel version on take offs and landings for the same reasons. If i was operating out of rougher fields or gravel I'd prefer to have the tailwheel version of the RV simply for the additional prop clearance.

[tjo]

Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002

And assuming both pilots skill levels are equal, the nose wheel can takeoff and land a little shorter

You already know they aren?t equal, one of them is flying a tail wheel

Tim

[rvbuilder2002]

Originally Posted by Mikeandmaz

If you?re already the older side of 50, like me, you?ll find the A easier to get into. I was set on a TW but after a visit to Vans factory and trying both for size the ease of entry sold the A for me. Still wish I was a lot under 50 tho!

Originally Posted by DeeCee 57

Scott
Whilst the land shorter has been beaten to death in different threads (and most of my nosey wheel friends don?t even venture on grass for fear of ripping the front end off ) and I could but won?t engage in a debate over this, I wonder how a whatever A model would take-off any shorter than a non-A?

Originally Posted by Robert Sailor

It's the higher angle of attack that you can get on the trike gear compared to the tailwheel version. If you check out the new Carbon Cub which is now offered in trike gear youll read or hear on utube that it will also out perform the tailwheel version on take offs and landings for the same reasons. If i was operating out of rougher fields or gravel I'd prefer to have the tailwheel version of the RV simply for the additional prop clearance.

Robert is correct

Takeoff and landing distance is based on airspeed at liftoff or touch down.
Airspeed required to lift a given amount of weight s based on angle of attack.
The RV-14 on all three wheels sits at a lower angle of attack than it is capable of flying at. There is nothing that can be done to make the angle of attack higher.
An A model can rotate to a higher angle of attack before the tail tie down drags the ground.

[emsvitil]

So where do you get longer landing gear for the 14?

[DeeCee 57]

still relating to take-off roll distance only, I wonder... on a grass field yesterday, applied full throttle with one notch of flaps during the roll, stick neutral to keep the 3 points attitude, and she levitates off the ground in a very short distance, in ground effect and below stall speed at around 40kts... (yes, 180 ponies and the 3 blade CSP produce quite some pull )
Could there be a difference, on grass strips, whereby the nose gear produces additional drag during the initial acceleration, or is the drag produced by the positive AOA of a taildragger greater?

Has any shoot-out on grass fields ever taken place?