What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Taildragger?

A

Abbygirl1

Well Known Member
OK guys....here's another question I'm pondering. I know there are diehards on both sides of this one, and I apologize in advance if this topic has been beat to death, but please bare with me. I see a lot of taildragger -6's for sale. I have my TD endorsement, but I owned a Thorp at the time and the dang thing scared me to death. No problems taking off or flying, but landing was terrifying, even for a CFII AND my C-17 Aircraft Commander son. So, I kept it 6 months and sold it. My question is this.....are Van's TD's any more docile. I cannot get into another situation where I'm scared to fly an A/C. Thanks again in advance. Let the games begin......
 
I've never flown a Thorp. And I've never flown an RV-6, so I don't know if this will be of any relevance. But I have about 75 hours in a Champ, about 125 hours in a Sonex, and about 115 hours in my RV-4. The -4 is the easiest of all to land. The Sonex wasn't far behind. Once I learned NOT to get to slow on final with full flaps, things went great. Landings are no problem, and I have flown this plane from North Florida to the back country of ID, WY, and MT, getting easily into short and long strips alike...

It might be of benefit to find someone close to you that has a -6 and get some time. I can't imagine you would be disappointed, much less frightened. They are extremely wonderful handling machines..
 
I've never flown a Thorp but the RV-6 is an extremely docile taildragger. For that matter, all of Van's taildraggers are pretty docile. How about finding someone to let you fly from the right/left seat on one? So you can judge for yourself. If you can make your way down this way, I'll be glad to let you fly mine. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised ... compared to how you describe the Thorp's characteristics.
 
Last edited:
First of all, let me say there is no bias towards RV?s to be found on this board of any kind.

I've flown a bunch of different taildraggers but never a T18. That said, the RV's are the easiest taildraggers I have ever flown.

The Thorps are all hand built and it is possible the gear on yours wasn't aligned properly, causing it to have less than desirable landing characteristics.

The RV-7, -8, -9, and now the -14 all have landing gear that come pre-drilled from the factory, meaning they should all line up out of the box.

Whatever RV you decide to buy, give it a test hop and see how it handles for yourself.
 
Not trying to sound snarky, but realize that being a CFII or a C17 pilot has zero bearing on one's ability to skillfully handle a tailwheel airplane. Tailwheel experience is all that matters. Did you ever check the wheel alignment on the T-18? It has wide, spring gear, and should not be considered a challenging tailwheel airplane. Never heard anyone say anything like this about them.

Sounds like you need to get your confidence back (or get confident to begin with) in tailwheel airplanes. The RV is very straightforward as tailwheel airplanes go. If you have basic tailwheel competency, then you will not have any problems.
 
Wow! Am I the only one here who's flown a T-18?
Difference between the T-18 and RV-6 is "Night-N-Day".
Landing the T-18 keeps you on your toes. Comparatively, the RV-6 is a pussy-cat.

Many years ago a good friend of mine flew a T-18 out of Addison Airport. Even though touch-n-goes were prohibited, every time John called final, the controller would ask, "Will this be full stop?" John's answer would always be "Hopefully!"
 
A while back I did a survey for pilot feedback. The bottom line was, overall for all RV's 40% were built with tail wheels and 60% with nose wheels. Of these, one out of almost 200 responders wished they had built a nose wheel instead of a tail wheel, so less than 1%, and 10% that built with nose wheels wished they had gone with tail wheels. This means that if everyone had what they really wanted the fleet would be split 50/50. My conclusion is: get my wife her tail wheel endorsement and build it right, er..., I mean with a tail wheel.

Tim
 
You may be lucky to find someone to give you tailwheel time in an RV. But you are probably better off finding someone who does it for a cost and get transition training. If you decide at the end that a taildragger is not for you. get an A model.

However, another of my biased opinionated opinions is keep A models off of non-paved surfaces.

Search the forum for tipover.
 
Last edited:
tjo said:
The bottom line was, overall for all RV's 40% were built with tail wheels and 60% with nose wheels. Of these, one out of almost 200 responders wished they had built a nose wheel instead of a tail wheel, so less than 1%, and 10% that built with nose wheels wished they had gone with tail wheels. This means that if everyone had what they really wanted the fleet would be split 50/50.
Click to expand...

All this proves is that taildragger pilots have huge egos and won't admit that they should have gone with an A model. :)
 
I have had both, a 7A and now a 6. I believe getting to handle (I wont say master) a tail dragger will make you a better piliot. Use of controls on take off and landing etc.
Anyone can fly one and as has been posted already, it is all about confidence and getting the right person to teach you.
If you are new to RVs and or you do not have the need to land on unimproved rougher surface runways or outback airstrips then just buy an A model and fly it for a few years then see if you have the desire for a cool looking taildragger.
Both taildragger and nose wheel RVs are so much fun it really doesnt matter IMO.

Paul
 
I have 400 hours in a BC-12 Taylorcraft, and 200 in my RV-4....I think the - 4 is easier to fly.I flew a C-150 today, and it was absolutely uncomfortable! I am sure you can get settled in the -6, and never look back.
 
fixnflyguy said:
I have 400 hours in a BC-12 Taylorcraft, and 200 in my RV-4....I think the - 4 is easier to fly...
Click to expand...
I too owned a BC-12 and have to agree, the RV's are easier to fly.

Although, the -9, with its long wing and FP prop is similar in that you cannot come in fast or you will float off the end of the runway.
 
My experience

I had about 1,700 hours, all but 9 in tricycle gear aircraft. The vast majority in AA5 series. My TW time was all in Cubs and was early 90's. I transitioned early last year to a TW -6. For the first 6 or so hours I was asking myself "why am I putting myself through this?". But, eventually, it all came together. Landed a couple of months ago in 14 G 21 90 degrees to the runway heading with no issues at all other than having to add power to get to the first turn off :)

If hamfisted (footed) me can do it anyone can :)
 
Eh, maybe

As stated before, there are many thorps out there. All (the bast majority) were built from scratch 100%. That said, there are many that fly great, and probably one or two here or there that aren't as great. Some of them were built too heavy. Some of them were probably not built straight. Some of them didn't/don't have flaps. Some of them have a newer, updated, and more efficient wing now. Don't assume that all thorps are squirrelly little rusted out machines...because they are not. Built correctly, they are a fine airplane at a fraction of the cost of an RV and performance is very similar to at least the RV6 anyway. I am a fan of thorps. I am a fan of RV's. I just hate to see a general perception of the thorp that is just not true. Just my 3 pennies. Worth just what you had to pay fur it.
 
we have 2 sevens and a 6-a at Morritown across the hill from you,come over one weekend for a test drive,423-736-0265,bob.
 
I have flown the T18 and down check outs in them and also the 6 the 6 is a piece of cake compared to the T18. You won't be disappointed in the 6 or any of Vans TW models.
 
I flew in a bushby mustang for my first tw ride and it scared me literally to death. Then I flew in an Rv 9 and it was smooth and straight forward- referring to tw handling. I would not have hesitated to buy a tw Rv, and plan on having one someday.

I can't believe how many scary handling tw airplanes are out there.
 
Couple of things.
Have you compared the cost of insuring a taildragger vs a tri-gear?
Also, if you don't really have need of a taildragger why subject yourself to that kind of anxiety?
Just my thoughts on the subject.

Jim
 
Jim T said:
Couple of things.
Have you compared the cost of insuring a taildragger vs a tri-gear?
...
Click to expand...
This is really a myth. The difference isn't large enough to matter and after the first 100 hours in type, it goes away.

Besides, life is too short, fly the plane you want to fly!
 
I've owned a Thorp, & flown several others. I learned to fly in a Luscombe & bought the Thorp soon after getting my license. I thought the Thorp was a great handling plane on the ground, and mine had 'hard' links from rudder to tailwheel.

A friend built an -8, & later owned a Thorp. He never complained about the Thorp, but was never comfortable in the -8 (and he has a LOT of hours in a lot of tailwheel a/c, including Pitts & Baby Great Lakes). All the other RV's are very docile on the ground (as taildraggers go).

Odds are, your plane had gear alignment issues, as others have mentioned. Try to get some time in several other t/w models, & start on grass, if you can. Grass is a lot more forgiving when you touch down with less than perfect alignment with the runway. :)

FWIW,

Charlie
 
During takeoff and landings, forward visibility is not really an issue. Usually not much to run into on a runway. But with a side by side, you have a huge blind spot even if you S turn your way along. It makes the chance of damage during ground maneuvers very real.

Years ago, Van's decided to only take trikes to air shows for that very reason. Your chances of hitting something or someone on the ground are far greater than ground looping.........Now a tandem is another story.
 
Jim T said:
Also, if you don't really have need of a taildragger why subject yourself to that kind of anxiety?
Click to expand...

Same could be said for the nose wheel, given the number of tip overs.

I've flown both the T-18 and various RV's, and can say that the flying characteristics are similar. I haven't landed a Thorp though, I let the owner do that. He didn't have any trouble doing it, and he wasn't a high-time pilot, either.
 
Jimmy - as others have mentioned, the tailwheel RV's are about as docile as they come. However, they need to be treated with respect just as any tailwheel airplane does. This is part of the fun and challenge for me and what has always driven me towards tailwheel aircraft.
This is a hobby/lifestyle for me, something I do for fun. Part of the fun is operating the machine and being challenged, having to think about technique and practicing it.
To me, the tailwheel is a big part of the fun. I simply prefer to fly and own tailwheel airplanes. That is my personal preference and nobody can argue with that, and I won't argue if others preference's are something different.
You have to start splitting hairs if you want to judge nose vs tail in RV's. Everybody justifies what they have, and I am no different.
You will be thrilled with either.
 
I have owned...

2 T-18s and have landed a -6 and a -9. My first T-18 was easier to land than the second. Could have been gear misalignment. I don't think you'll have a problem landing an RV-6.
 
There are a couple of T-18's at my home field. The builder of my RV-6 got his checkout in one of the T-18's and he always said the T-18 is much more difficult to keep straight and the RV-6 he built (now mine) is a piece of cake to keep straight during landing rollout compared to the T-18. The other T-18's owner also always said he has to be pretty quick and nimble with the feet to keep it straight too.

I've got a fair number of hours in a friend's RV-4, another friend's RV-8, and now about 50 in my RV-6. I find the RV-6 to be a bit harder to land consistently well, than either the -4 or the -8. The -8 was a piece of cake to land consistently well every time. I have no problems keeping my -6 straight during the landing rollout, that part is really tame. My biggest landing issue when I first got the -6 was judging the height above the runway to flare, and flaring a bit too high, since I'm short and cannot see as well over the nose and outside the plane as well as I could in the -8 or the -4, but over time I've gotten accustomed to that without having to rig up a thicker seat cushion since I like the way the seat height is while in level cruise :cool:
 
Last edited:
Neal@F14 said:
My biggest landing issue when I first got the -6 was judging the height above the runway to flare, and flaring a bit too high, since I'm short and cannot see as well over the nose and outside the plane as well as I could in the -8 or the -4, but over time I've gotten accustomed to that without having to rig up a thicker seat cushion since I like the way the seat height is while in level cruise :cool:
Click to expand...
The 6 is the most forward limited in sight of any of the fleet. Not sure if this helps Neal or if you are already doing this, but once I get into ground effect my sight line is out the bottom left corner of the windscreen. I use the same technique in my Bucker with forward visibility which is 90% blind in cruise and 100% when the nose is raised. The advantage the Bucker has is even if you put the stick back too early, if you are straight, at the right airspeed, and keep the stick in your lap, she settles in with 11 inches of oleo travel. Not so much with the 6 which will bounce and skip. Still, all is forgiven if you keep the stick in your lap.
 
Jim T said:
...Also, if you don't really have need of a taildragger why subject yourself to that kind of anxiety...
Click to expand...

What anxiety?

...Anyway, the same can be said for "homebuilts"...

...Or any aircraft, for that matter!

To the OP -

As has been pointed out, RV's are among the most benign taildraggers out there. There are plenty of designs that are far more challenging, yet people learn to master them as well. That said, not all pilots are capable of flying all airplanes. I wouldnt let one bad T-18 experience be the basis for your entire decision so you really need to get some time in a -6 to know for sure.
 
Last edited:
I might add a couple of the things I've found I really like about the taildragger coming from one with low hours in taildraggers:

1. My RV-9 is so much more benign than the other taildraggers I've flown. I've never felt out of control like I did a few times while learning to flying a Stinson 108. (Knock on wood! :D)

2. Having a tailwheel gives me 2 ways to land the airplane whereas in a trike I've only got one. Not only does this make flying more fun, but I've found that wheel landings give me a great deal of control (especially in winds) without the tendency to bounce or hop that I might get when trying to land nose up where the wings are still generating a bit of lift that I might not have let bleed off. Both methods are good for certain types of landings, but having that choice is a good thing.

I'm still working on learning to fly and land well, but I'm really glad I made the decision I did. I would not recommend letting fear or anxiety (based on lack of experience in an RV taildragger) factor into your decision.

Good luck with whatever you decide, however.
 
Last edited:
JonJay said:
... Not sure if this helps Neal or if you are already doing this, but once I get into ground effect my sight line is out the bottom left corner of the windscreen.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I've learned to do in the -6. That little quadrant of area in front of the wing and to the side of the cowl is where I'm getting my flare height vision from. When I was first started flying the -6, I was keeping my eyes straight ahead down to the far end of the runway, like I learned in the Cub, Supercub, Citabria, etc, and carried on in landing the -4 and -8 since that technique worked so well in those planes where you sit on the centerline. Looking out the lower side of the windshield in the -6 sure helps to judge the height better and using the runway pavement edge as a visual reference to keep the rollout straight works pretty good too.
 
Toobuilder said:
What anxiety?

...Anyway, the same can be said for "homebuilts"...

...Or any aircraft, for that matter!

To the OP -

As has been pointed out, RV's are among the most benign taildraggers out there. There are plenty of designs that are far more challenging, yet people learn to master them as well. That said, not all pilots are capable of flying all airplanes. I wouldnt let one bad T-18 experience be the basis for your entire decision so you really need to get some time in a -6 to know for sure.
Click to expand...

Actually the anxiety I was refrering to is the anxiety that the OP mentioned when dealing with taildraggers earlier in his flying career.

It's not unlike the guy that goes to the doctor and tells him that "it hurts when I raise my arm up this high". The doctor then replies "then don't raise it up that high". ;)

Jim
 
Well I have to admit that my earlier experiences with the Hiperbipe almost made me sell it. I have one scraped wingtip, a ground loop which took out the gear and broke a spar, and a runway light to my credit, all done on separate incidents. However, I buckled down and decided the airplane was not going to beat me without a heck of a fight and I can honestly say I have mastered the thing. I can land it in a howling crosswind on a narrow runway with my eyes closed. It's so simple for me to fly I have to remind myself that I would often return from a flight drenched in sweat and so exhausted that I needed time to recover before climbing out of the cockpit.

I'm sure glad today that I hung in there. I'm a far better pilot for the experience. I've since jumped into a RV-8, Harmon Rocket, and RV-6 cold, with no "transition training" and found them all to be a piece of cake to fly.
 
Last edited:
Ron Lee said:
All this proves is that taildragger pilots have huge egos and won't admit that they should have gone with an A model. :)
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the most gratifying thing I've ever done with an aircraft was to execute a precise wheel landing in a crosswind. Can only do this when the little wheel in on the correct end of the beast. In the air,they fly the same; it's the interface with terra firma that differentiates the tail from the nose draggers.
 
walkman said:
Because the t/w pilots are much cooler? :D
Click to expand...

Yes, but isn't this a self evident truth enshrined in the constitution? Duh! (this, being said by by a -7 builder, but a current Cherokee flyer .. but, I can grease a wheelie out of a Citabria, though!)
 
This all l;ooks good to me. I have very nearly finished an RV4 and was concerned about how the land. I have 300 plus hours in a Corby Starlet and wonder if anyone here has time on the Corby to compare with the RV4
 
jbDC9 said:
Literally? Then why are you still alive to post about it??
I keed...
Click to expand...

"Literally" has to be one of the most miss-used words in the English language. It drives me up the wall.
The first time I really noticed it was many years ago when RCA came out with a new picture tube (CRT). In the ad, a technician came on and said "The picture literally jumps out of the screen."
Needless to say, I didn't buy one of those TVs!
 
I love this thread.

It's taught me how good and egotistic I really am.

I'm impressed.
 
Mel said:
"Literally" has to be one of the most miss-used words in the English language. It drives me up the wall.
The first time I really noticed it was many years ago when RCA came out with a new picture tube (CRT). In the ad, a technician came on and said "The picture literally jumps out of the screen."
Needless to say, I didn't buy one of those TVs!
Click to expand...

I actually did buy one of those TVs and they were right. The picture literally jumped out of the screen as advertised. :D
 
Tail wheel fear

I was trained to fly nose wheel aircraft and they are very forgiving in take off and landing. But I wanted an RV3 so I built one then I took training for several hours until the insurance company was happy then I flew my RV3. I found the RV3 was much easier to fly than the Piper PA-11 I took training in.
Even though I do not have much time in my 3 it is easy to land and take off but even so I do have to work the pedals a little more than the nose wheel aircraft when my tail comes down to the surface, "I almost always land just on the front main gear then let the tail settle slowly as I roll out".
I would say if you are more compfortable with a nose wheel, that is what you should fly. I do believe they are easier to control on the surface but getting to the surface I have found nothing easier than my RV3. I have made more very smooth landings in it than any other aircraft and I think it has to do with landing on the main wheels in a level attitude. Personally I have fallen in love with flying and landing my RV3, I think it is so cool to cruise down the runway with the tail in the air and some times I even hold it up in the air for as long as possible with the elevator. I have even tried hitting the brakes while the tail is in the air and I found that to be a little tricky at first because it seems I always hit one brake harder than the other and have to correct with rudder and let off the brake a little. I found that I can stop very fast that way because all the weight is on the main gear, yes I do have to work the elevator to keep the tail from lifting up too far! At first it is alot to play with but it does not take long to be having fun do it over and over.
Robin from Minnesota
 
wjb said:
Sorry, but the most gratifying thing I've ever done with an aircraft was to execute a precise wheel landing in a crosswind.
Click to expand...

This.

There's (almost) nothing more satisfying than when you're able to successfully grease the upwind main onto the pavement while keeping the darn plane rolling straight and then gently lowering the other main wheel down to the runway, and still keeping the rollout straight in a strong crosswind... especially when you've got an audience watching :p

Mel said:
It drives me up the wall.
Click to expand...

Not literally, I hope? :D :D :D
 
Neal@F14 said:
...There's (almost) nothing more satisfying than when you're able to successfully grease the upwind main onto the pavement while keeping the darn plane rolling straight and then gently lowering the other main wheel down to the runway, and still keeping the rollout straight in a strong crosswind... especially when you've got an audience watching :p
Click to expand...

Flew into Santa Paula airport during one of their "display days". Not only was it a gusty, howling crosswind, but it was crowded with people. As it turns out, because of the weather, all arrivals were closely scrutinized because most were downright entertaining. As luck would have it, I made one of the best landings ever in this airplane. A total grease job, stopping nice and short. And to top it off, there was even one of those professional "plane spotter" photographers there to capture the moment:

576359.jpg
 
Toobuilder said:
And to top it off, there was even one of those professional "plane spotter" photographers there to capture the moment
Click to expand...

Great looking Hiperbipe, and a sweet picture! Nice touch is the "Biplane Rides" sign on the hangar right above your plane. :cool:
 
I find it interesting to read all the crowing about how making a good x-wind tailwheel landing is so gratifying. I'm sure to the posts are correct.

By definition, this means they are RARE.

I don't want to be a passenger in the plane on the other occasions. Have been and didn't like it.

I'll take the nose dragger please.

And Jimmy, if you can wait until I get back from overseas, I owe you a ride, mate.
 
In this context, "Good" landings in any airplane are rare, as evidenced at any pancake fly out attended by more than 2 aircraft. Even on a normal day, you will see plenty of sketchy trike landings.

I will land a tailwheel RV or my Hiperbipe anywhere a similar nosewheel aircraft will go, and no one on board will even break a sweat. Safe and completely in control are the norm, not the exception.

...but greasing one on (even in calm weather) in front of hundreds of people and a photographer...

THAT'S rare!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top