The evolution of landing gear??

AndyRV7 · #1 10-30-2007, 07:38 AM

I've been trying to decide what to do with this landing gear choice (either in an RV, or even in a certified plane I might like to buy soon).

I guess I am not far from the norm, so I have a trememdous inclination to bail to the less challenging tricycle set-up. But I also would like to fly to grass strips and I am under the impression that a tail wheel is better for that (although I have no facts to support this).

I am a little worried that maybe there is a reason that planes evolved into tricycle set-ups, and if I am mistaken about an RV's ability to land safely and consistently at a grass field, then maybe I am wasting my time even considering the tail-wheel version of a plane.

So can anyone help me understand the issue a little better? Maybe fill in some of the facts so I can make my own educated decision? I realize that the gear choice in an RV may be a heated topic and I don't really want to start a debate, but I figured if I could understand why planes evolved the way they did a little better, maybe I could make a better choice. I imagine the greater numbers of paved runways around the world probably had somethign to do with it. But maybe there is more to it??

For what it's worth, I think any plane I end up owning would see mostly paved landings, but the appeal of being able to fly into a grass, mountain strip from time to time is a big part of the appeal to me. I absolutely want to do some adventure/wilderness sight seeing trips, not just laps around the field, or trips to Atlantic City or Block Island (although those will be fun too).

Thanks for the help! Andy

DeltaRomeo · #2 10-30-2007, 07:48 AM

Hi Andy,

My advice would be to choose the configuration you want without worrying about the skill set needed for use. In my case, I had zero tailwheel time when I built my RV. My first tailwheel hour was the first hour in Alex's transition training RV-6.

I never found it to be that big of a deal. They are both fine to use and only require minor technique adjustments.

Best,
Doug

N941WR · #3 10-30-2007, 08:09 AM

Doug has some good advice.

Build the plane you want and then learn to fly it. Getting the Tail Wheel endorsement is just like learning to land all over again. In about 10 hours you will be fine, in 20 you will wonder what the big deal was.

FWIW, RV's are one of the easiest TW airplanes I have ever flown.

N908RV · #4 10-30-2007, 08:16 AM

You are interested in RV's undoubtedly because they are a sporty craft, well, think of the TW versions as even a bit more sporting. I second Bill's comment, RV's are fairly docile taildraggers.

It's really just a matter of personal preference.

AndyRV7 · #5 10-30-2007, 08:20 AM

Well, you guys are certainly taking some of the fear out of it!!

I am looking forward to wrapping up my PPL and then going to get some tail training (for the fun of it) over at Andover Aeroflex. I can either aplly that to an RV at some point, or just have fun logging the hours in a Cub (and picking up the extra skill!).

Jalanci · #6 10-30-2007, 08:30 AM

I'm still debating this myself and researched it on this site as well as looked at the NTSB accident reports. I think this will ultimately be a personal choice and needs accessment. Their is some concern with the nosewheel being a bit light and has collapsed on some hard landings and soft strips due to it's digging in. Alternatively, the tailwheel will be susceptible to ground loops, particularly when there are windy conditions. I plan on flying over 150 hours per year and once i figure it out I don't think I'll be intimidated by the ground control, so I'm leaning towards a tailwheel. That said, go-no go decisions will include the wind conditions at the airports. Block Island can be treacherous with cross-winds and have seen a few pilots come in white faced after a landing there. It's a great trip though.

Tailwheels evolved into tricycle geared planes to make it a bit easier to control the aircraft on the ground. I believe the center of gravity is behind the mains on the tailwheel, requiring more attention on the ground. The reason many RVers may not have as many problems is that the average pilot flies less than 40 hours per year, but I would bet the RVers fly more and have more experience. The biggest complaint with the tri-gears is the front gear seems to be a bit light and has been known to collapse. If you're flying into Katama, no problem. Flying into the paved airport near Killington, VT you taxi on grass and it's a bit bumpy. Basin Harbor, VT needs to be checked before you go, but another great destination, park next to the restaurant and the grass strip is right next to the restaurant. Bring clubs and enjoy a round there.

fmarino1976 · #7 10-30-2007, 08:41 AM

I don't have anything against TD per se, but I believe that one of the reasons most new airplanes are tricicle gear has to do with the fact that TD are susceptible to ground loops because the CG is aft of the the main wheels. Don't ask me how I know! Another thing is that the effect of a crosswind on a TD, as it tends to weather vane into the wind.
Again, I'm not trying to put down the TD or scare you, but you asked why airplanes evolved into tricycles. Also, insurance premiums will be higher for TD that tricycles. How much? I don't really know, and that might not even be a concern to you.

I guess the best advise would be for you to bum a ride in both types and decide then. Hope this helps

N941WR · #8 10-30-2007, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmarino1976

Also, insurance premiums will be higher for TD that tricycles. How much? I don't really know, and that might not even be a concern to you.

This seems to be urban legend. An -7A builder and myself were just comparing quotes and the only difference we can see is he placed his hull value at $10K higher than I did. We both had around 350 hours TT when the quotes were issued with me having over 100 hours TW but none in RV's and he has about 100 hours in RV-7A's. So that should be a wash.

Of course, your total time and TT to TW time ratio might impact your quote.

Just remember, when talking to other builders, myself included, they will tell you what airplane they want you to build. Build the plane you want and learn to fly it. (I can't tell you how many people tried to talk me out of building a TW -9, including some Van's employees.)

java · #9 10-30-2007, 09:44 AM

You've already heard about the CG being behind, instead of in front of, the mains. The best example that seems to make sense to people I've heard is to think of pushing a grocery cart forwards and it acts like a tricycle gear aircraft. Think of pushing it backwards and it acts like a TW aircraft. Try it sometime, if you haven't. You'll notice that pushing it backwards, if you get it a little cockeyed the back end will want to swing out (i.e. groundloop).

Apart from (and really, because of) the physics, the reason that planes evolved towards nosewheels is because they are easier to fly, all other things equal. Some will tell you TW's are not harder, just different. It's a nice sentiment, but I disagree. That is not to say that it is "hard" to learn how to fly a tail dragger, but it is a little harder than a nosewheel because you have to be more precise in your handling when landing, taking off and taxiing... just like you have to be a little more precise if you want to push your grocery cart backwards. Funny thing though... if you pushed that grocery cart backwards for a few hours, I bet it would become natural and you wouldn't really think about it too much.

I bought a couple books and read the voluminous posts about how one is better than the other in certain circumstances and how both are succeptable to certain types of mishandling accidents. In the end, I chose TW (despite having zero hours in them at the time) because this is an adventure for me. If I wanted utility, I'd be building a 10, or taking up woodworking as a hobby instead. This is supposed to be challenging and fun (at least, that's how I look at it), and TW fit that bill better for me after doing my research.

I now have about 25 hrs. in a Supercub and LOVE it!

AndyRV7 · #10 10-30-2007, 10:16 AM

This is all good info. Thanks!

I guess I am just at the point where I know a TD is going to be more challenging. That alone is not a problem to me. But if that is something that will end up having a real negative impact on my ability to use the plane (wind conditions too trecherous), and that fact isn't offset by the fact that I can now land in places a trike cannot, then I feel like I might be wasting the effort.

I must say though that the look of the TD has really grown on me. But this is still going to be a tough decision. I think that I should have plenty of time to finish my PPL and then take at least a few TD lessons before I need to make an RV decision. Maybe that will help too. And I think someone said that I should try to bum a ride in both. That seems like very good advice!!