Want Taildragger Opinions

[Bill Dicus]

Sorry!! Forgot to mention that crosswinds are fine in a taildragger with good control authority, and I think RV's have that. The Pitts is hands down the best airplane to land in a crosswind I have ever flown. It can safely be landed on a hard surface in direct crosswinds over 35 knots - although it could get dicey on an extremely narrow runway in that condition. Such direct x-winds are rare and I doubt you'd find any serious wind problems after getting used to your airplane. It's a fun challenge. The tri-gear is easier but not so much fun. Bill Dicus

[cobra]

Alan,
Ive been going thru the same questions as you- hard decisions to make for sure. My final decision is the 9A. The reasons for MY choice: the greater angle of attack of the triwheel, greater lift of the 9A wing and slower landing/takeoff speed is better suited for grass strip use AND for normal use at windy, high density altitude, airports that are the rule here in the West.

I noticed that with EQUAL POWER, the 9A is very close to the 7A performance numbers, but the 9A tends to be slightly more efficient. Both burn a lot of fuel at full throttle with minimal speed increases, so Im guessing that most of the flight time will be at slower speeds, where the 9A has the advantage.

FWIW, I plan to go with a turbocharged Rotary engine, which easily generates 200 HP if/when desired at the same flight weight as less powerful (160) Lyc engine; Im guessing the rotary powered 9A will perform as well (or better) than a 7A with the large engine (at full power) and a bit better at part throttle (without boost).

[RV7Factory]

I have to be honest, I didn't read all the replies, just sort of skimmed them so I hope this wasn't already said...

Something else to consider is how often you will fly. I will say that after 4+ years of nothing but tailwheel flying I feel much less comfortable in the cockpit, after an extended period of no flying (winter weather, annuals, etc.). I have learned that I must keep my T/W skills honed, otherwise I get a little sloppy. If you are going to fly all the time, no issue, but if you see yourself having times of inactivity, then it might be another factor to consider.

On a related, but anecdotal note...
Until recently I hadn't flown or flown in a nosewheel airplane for over 4 years. A few months ago I took a ride in a nosewheel with an experienced pilot who only has a few hours of T/W time. When we came in on short final I found my pucker factor went through the canopy (roof). We were sideways, off centerline, this way, that way, anyway but the way I have become accustomed to being in a T/W. I found myself entire body tense as we flared, as if to prepare for the worst, but as the wheels touched we straightened right out and cruised right down the runway. I think I'll just stop without further comment.

BTW... I am building a 7. Good luck!

[hngrflyr]

I've been flying tailwheel airplanes for lotsa years. Mostly light two seaters like Cessna 140s, Luscombes etc. My RV-6 is one of the easier ones I've flown. The tail wheel steering couldn't be more positive. Unless there is a lot of wind, you just drive it around. I've landed in crosswinds at 17 kts at right angle to the runway without problems. If I were going to complain about anything, it would be lack of visibility over the right side of the nose, but I understand that has been addressed somewhat in the RV-7. My biggest surprise when I first started out in my RV-6 was the amount of right rudder it takes to keep the pointy end headed straight down the runway on take off. Thats just a matter of learning your airplane.

Bob S

[L.Adamson]

Went through the same thought process between the 6 & 6A. In all honesty, I thought the 6's looked kind of whimpy on the ground (but better than the tri-gear in the air), and the 6A as looking more substantial. Still do! Kind of like a Glasair retractable tri-gear on the ground, versus the squatty looking taildragger...

IMO, as a taildragger, the F1's and Harmon Rockets have that more macho, tough, mean, and fast look! Of course, I'd never think of an 8A either, and an 8 would have to be a tailwheel.

But being "practical", and needing a side by side for cross countries with the wife, I went with the more "substantial" looking 6A. And the "gear tower" is totally un-noticeable. I'm tall, but short legs.

L.Adamson

[Allan N. Spreen]

All the responses are MOST helpful- I LOVE THIS SITE!

[Oh, to Rick, as I'm in Arizona I'm going with the slider-type (cooler) canopy, but in this case there isn't much decision. I wanted a fixed windshield, and the big downside for me of not having the tip-up was access to the baggage area (the tougher instrument access I'll put up with). Now that I've seen the COMBINED 'slider/tip-up' canopy (I forget the name of the guy who designed it but I'll locate him when it's time), I can now have "both" for about $150 extra.]

Thanks again, everyone...more helpful than you can possibly imagine.
Allan

[tinman]

When it came time for my decision on my 8 vs. 8A project, I went out and got my tailwheel endorsement in a '46 Luscombe. I am a low (125 hrs) time pilot and found that the tailwheel was a blast! I was fortunate to take my training in the high winds of March/ April, so I was able to see THE BEAST. My instructor had such a calm demeanor in spite of my early efforts to kill us both :-) In a few hours, I had three-pointers down and was getting close with wheeling it on. Once I overcame my fear of the ground, wheeling it on became easier. I probably only have a total of ten hours in a taildragger, but they were good hours and I count them as some of the best hours spent in my life when it comes to fun factor. My thoughts are that all of us should get a few hours in a taildragger just for the fun of it, and I can promise that your tri-gear landings will improve, as will your awareness of what the winds are doing around the air field.

[gmcjetpilot]

Originally Posted by Allan N. Spreen

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.

Your thread is getting some good advice and replies, with fact and not the usual emotion on the topic.

I have 1,000 TD's and a lot more in tri-gear. Most of my 1000 hour TD time is in RV-4/6. With your 100hr TD time, you will make the transition to the RV TD a non-event with no problem. The RV TD's land very nice with: low landing speed, good vis (for a TD), good rudder authority, solid feel and long gear base. Before my first RV flight about 12 years ago, most of my recent TD time was in a clip-wing cub about a year before. I had about 50 hours TD at that time. The RV-4 was a non-event. I will not give you the PROS & CONS of TD Vs. Tri-gear, but I will tell you for a TD the RV is a very nice, easy and pleasant to fly TD, with no bad habits, good fwd Vis and ground handling.

My previous TD time: Cub, Luscombe, Citabria and a few flights in a T-6 and Sterman each. (The Sterman flew me a little.) The RV edges the Cub out in ease of landing. (The Cub had the funky heal brakes.)

I say a RV landing is like landing a fast Piper Cub, very docile. Go fly a RV, than try a "RV-A" model, it will help you make your mind up. Many people who try to make the decision have zero TD time, so you are way ahead of the game. I personally like the TD, and my second RV is a RV-7 I am building now. I have no second thoughts. I think it is just more fun when it comes down to it.

I agree with the other Gent, the myth of the steely eyed taildragger pilot is a joke, it just is not that hard. Also visibility is pretty good and S-turns are pretty much not needed. I do think a TD has better steering for taxi, because the "A" model really has no steering. You have to jab/drag brakes to steer. I never drove an "A" model or a Grumman, so I can't tell you what that is like. All the Tri-gears I have flown, C150 to B767, have nose wheel steering.

A couple of one liners (facts/opinion): Taildragger is easier to build without the cowl/nose gear details; TD has more room in cockpit ("A" model gear support structure); 4 into 1 exhaust is not an option with the "A" model; Insurance will be a lot with 100/300 hrs, but consider ground and /or liability insurance only until you have more time (may be get the $30K avionics suite later until you get it insured).

Cheers George

PS:
Tip-up Slider: http://www.aircraftextras.com/Tip-Up-Slider1.htm
RV-9A builder w/ tip/slider: http://www.n2prise.org/Tugwell1.htm

[RV7ator]

This is a particularly good thread on the T/N Dragger. Lots of good info without the usual swagger.

I went with the 7 because of three major points you live with virtually all the time you fly or are around the airplane.

1. The main gear support structure in the ND is an engineering abomination. Somebody made the decision that parts commonality is more important than human factors, forgetting the near-hippocratic oath that engineering focuses on the end user, not the contrivance. That jungle-gym mess will ALWAYS be in the way, and I refuse to get used to an elephant in the living room.

2. The TD is a simpler airplane to build and maintain, overall, reflected in the price delta.

3. Getting you and baggage in and out is easier with the tail on the ground.

I have surprised myself with very nice landings of the 7 in crosswinds that would given me the hot fantods in my 172, also. The RVs are gentle taildraggers, but you will take greater notice knowing it's a taildragger, so that, to me, gooses the awareness factor. (I've actually come closest to removing runway lights by getting careless in the 172.)

John Siebold

[DeltaRomeo]

Originally Posted by RV7ator

...I have surprised myself with very nice landings of the 7 in crosswinds that would given me the hot fantods in my 172, also.

John,

I can't remember the last time I've read the word 'fantods' anywhere. I actually laughed out loud <grin>. I would have also liked to see 'it gave me a case of the horribles.'

I agree with all your TD/ND points. Friday I flew Danny King's Beautiful Doll (RV-8 TD) for the first time - my first time in a RV-8 solo. NO BIG DEAL. Today after the weekend RV breakfast I flew Jay Pratt's 'Shooter' - a Super Cub type A/C made by a company called NorthStar. NO BIG DEAL. Sad but true: There is no steely-eyed tailwheel pilot <grin>.

Best,
dr

Fantods: http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-fan1.htm