VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #1  
Old 05-25-2010, 06:55 PM
jarvis jarvis is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lexington, KY
Posts: 330
Default Musings of a new RV pilot...or nose vs tail...wheel

I was able to fly last week in Jan B's -6 and -6A (another post).

I wanted to post MY thoughts, impressions, and lessons learned for those who are still debating on which end to mount the third wheel. I am not advocating one way or the other--just sharing what I learned.

A little background--I am a PPSEL with an instrument rating and 500+ hours in my logbook. Have never flown anything bigger or more complex than a Piper Geronimo. I had 5-7 hours in an Airknocker when I went to Okeechobee--no endorsement.

I have been set on the -A model from day one; simply because of the ground vis and the fact that I think it is much easier to get in and out of the tri-gear model. Lately, however, small doubts had crept into my mind as I read/heard of the various nosegear problems.

So, I decided that I would go fly both models with a professional before I committed many more $$$$$$ to either.

Opinions I formed;

(1) RV6's are an absolute BLAST to fly--wherever the wheels are mounted.

(2) Both models are easy to land IF;
(a) If you fly a stabilized approach at the appropriate airspeed.
(b) If you're patient.

If on the other hand, you've developed bad habits flying Pipers and
Cessnas (as I had--what I call "lazy flying"), the RV's will insist
that you start flying with some precision again.

(3) Both models handle well on the ground--especially the taildragger. In
fact, I felt it was easier to taxi than the -A model. Beginners luck???

(4) As we taxied Jan's -6A through a ditch in front of his hanger each day,
and then bounced along to the runway, my faith in the nosegear was
restored.

(5) This is another never-ending subject--both of his props are FP. I had
no problem slowing down either airplane in the pattern.

(6) The -6A is 160HP and the -6 is 180HP, and both were very responsive.
BTW, we flew at or near gross weight all week.

I was having so much fun trying to "tame" the taildragger during the week that I briefly wavered in my decision as to which model. In the end, however,
I decided to stick with the tricycle for the same reasons as before.

FWIW, I came home with my taildragger endorsement in my logbook

My humble apologies to all for the length of this post.
__________________
Thanks,
Jarvis
Purchased flying RV-7A
RV-7A emp finished, wings next.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-26-2010, 06:12 AM
pierre smith's Avatar
pierre smith pierre smith is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Louisville, Ga
Posts: 7,840
Default Probably the best written and unbiased....

...comparison that I've ever read....very accurate,

Thanks,
__________________
Pierre Smith
RV-10, 510 TT
RV6A (Sojourner) 180 HP, Catto 3 Bl (502Hrs), gone...and already missed
Air Tractor AT 502B PT 6-15 Sold
Air Tractor 402 PT-6-20 Sold
EAA Flight Advisor/CFI/Tech Counselor
Louisville, Ga

It's never skill or craftsmanship that completes airplanes, it's the will to do so,
Patrick Kenny, EAA 275132


Dues gladly paid!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:28 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.