RV-9: 3 pt or 2 pt landings?

The RV-8 landing thread got me thinking...

I'm about out of Phase I now and am wondering if my experiences landing are at all consistent with others flying the RV-9 (not 9A). I find that touchdowns are much more consistently good doing wheel landings as opposed to 3-pt. I'm not sure if I'm just not quite yet landing slow enough, but I am much more likely to balloon and/or bounce when trying to land with the tail down. I kind of get the feeling that there's still too much angle of attack on the -9's wings, even in the 3-pt attitude. (Though, supposedly, that's why the RV-9's gear legs are longer than those of the -7.)

I know I need to be able to master both as much as possible, and as I approach the summer season where I plan to be on grass strips more, I'd like to be able to count on the 3-pointers more consistently, but which do you find works the best? And, at what point do grass strips require a 3-pt landing?

alpinelakespilot2000 said:

.......... And, at what point do grass strips require a 3-pt landing?

Click to expand...

...If they're short...like 1500', then you'd have a hard time wheel landing and not scaring yourself when you run out of runway. Before you do that, practise three-pointers at your paved runway and have just enough speed left to arrest the sink and flare. Then brake fairly hard and measure the runway you used to land and stop.

Best,

alpinelakespilot2000 said:

I'm about out of Phase I now and am wondering if my experiences landing are at all consistent with others flying the RV-9 (not 9A). I find that touchdowns are much more consistently good doing wheel landings as opposed to 3-pt. I'm not sure if I'm just not quite yet landing slow enough, but I am much more likely to balloon and/or bounce when trying to land with the tail down. I kind of get the feeling that there's still too much angle of attack on the -9's wings, even in the 3-pt attitude.

Click to expand...

In my opinion, this is why many prefer to wheel land - they're simply easier to do - in that you don't have to be precise with your airspeed or attitude at touchdown...only descent rate. A good 3-pointer in a lightly-loaded airplane that does not sit on the ground at the stall attitude is more challenging because if you touch a little on the mains, the airplane wants to keep flying. And if you touch down with too much descent rate, that spring gear will bounce you and you'll keep flying. But if you touch down softly, perfectly 3-point, there's nothing that can disturb a perfect landing unless you hit a bump on the runway at high speed.

And if you're using less than full flaps trying to 3-point, you're making things even harder for yourself. I think 3-pointers are generally more challenging to do perfectly in any airplane, since your zero descent rate and perfect 3-point attitude must coincide right at the ground level. Wheel landing removes the need to time one of these factors perfectly. But I'm not generally a fan of wheel landings. If I wanted it easy, I'd fly a trike.

alpinelakespilot2000 said:

I find that touchdowns are much more consistently good doing wheel landings as opposed to 3-pt.

Click to expand...

Me too. RV-9 wheel lands so easy, I find myself becoming too lazy to do 3 pointers.

This is an RV-9 topic

OK...the original poster started this thread asking about 3-point landings versus 2-point landings in an RV-9!

Without calling anyone out, this thread is very specific (it's in the RV-9/9A forum, folks!) and is already starting to drift. The poll is specifically about the RV-9, not other RV's or other brands.

I will offer what little I know. During the factory tour, I was told that the RV-9 tends to balloon during the landing flare for a 3-point landing if the airspeed is not controlled much more carefully than for the other RV taildraggers, due to the John Roncz airfoil of the RV-9. Therefore, for some pilots the RV-9 can be more of a challenge than the other RV taildraggers.

My -9 doesn't seem to care how I land but I wheel land 95% of the time because it is easier and the sight picture is better. On grass I try to 3 point. I guess you can say the three point attitude in a -9 is a little uncomfortable because of the high stance of the nose on the ground with the tail down. You need to hold the three point attitude until the plane is ready to drop onto all three wheels.

JDRhodes said:

Me too. RV-9 wheel lands so easy, I find myself becoming too lazy to do 3 pointers.

Click to expand...

Thanks Jeff. Am I correct in remembering (from somewhere) that you regularly land on grass? At what point does one need to land 3-pt on grass--just when it is super soft or all the time?

rv7boy said:

OK...the original poster started this thread asking about 3-point landings versus 2-point landings in an RV-9!

Click to expand...

Yes, this is definitely just an RV-9 thread. For those who are not aware, and as I noted earlier, the RV-9, with it's significantly different wings and longer mains, presents issues that the other RV's may not.

Wheel landings seem much easier for me. That said, I will often wheel land with the tailwheel only barely off the ground (particularly on short/soft strips), so maybe that's really a 3-pointer?

Greg

Hello Steve,

I still have to say that of the airplanes I have flown, mine own is the most challenging to land! For a while I did mostly wheel landings, but I find that when I travel with the plane (which I do quite a bit) I usually have bags in the back (flight case, crew bag) and with the aft CG I end up with a sort of tail-low wheel landing or just simply a 3 pointer. With the 3-pointer, I have found that if I nail 55kias on short final, it settles down nicely with very little bucking (yeah like a bronco sometimes). Once I touch down, pulling all the way back on the stick really "locks" the tailwheel down and generally pretty decent landings.

The difference in a wheel landing is really the approach speed. If I come in at 55 knots it's tough to keep the tail up, so I really need about 60 knots. Well if you look at a 1.3 vso approach speed rule, 53-54 is appropriate. At 60 (sometimes even faster) I float and float or some yes...bounce and bounce.

I suppose in the end, it's the nice thing about a tailwheel. You really have more options for landing and it can make it more interesting (or terrifying).

Some good ideas. Thanks!

I didn't vote because for me it depends.

With the small engine, I was tail heavy and it was difficult to wheel land.

Now, with the large engine up front, it is difficult three point and loves to wheel land.

Like the others, my wheel landings are tail low.

Tony hit it right on the head, I use 55 Kts solo and 60 Kts with two on board.

The -9 wheel lands so nice but the challenge is getting thing to slow down before pinning the tail or you will find yourself flying again with decaying airspeed.

It's not so much what the plane likes - it's what I prefer - wheels first. A screwed up wheels ends up as a bouncy 3 ptr. After 250 some hr. most off of my grass I still have few "perfect landings". When it happens it sure feels good though. Good excuse for more practice!

up on the main for me in a 9

Here is a post/video I did with all bouncy 3 pointers for tail wheel testing purposes. Aside from this, we usually always plan to land on the mains.

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=96030

Home base is 1800 ft grass with a sizable hump in the runway right in the touchdown zone. With a wheel landing, I'm better able to "fly" over the hump and touch down on the back side rather than being nose-high in a 3-pt.

Wheel landing on grass is fine as long as the ground is solid. I probably wouldn't if the grass was tall or it it was muddy -but I try not to fly off of the runway in those conditions anyway. Or if I was really trying to stop short, a 3 pt is probably better.

I usually 3 pt when I'm landing off pavement somewhere new.