Ground loop vs Bent nose wheel

[Toobuilder]

Originally Posted by RV7AV8R

...Other than opinions there isn't much data that a new builder can use to help make a decision...

So the "goal" of this is to somehow guide a new builder to making a choice about their airplane based on the probability of it flipping or ground looping?

One of the problems with this comparison is that a ground loop usually makes for a funny story among friends, while the flip makes the evening news.

[N8RV]

Originally Posted by Toobuilder

One of the problems with this comparison is that a ground loop usually makes for a funny story among friends, while the flip makes the evening news.

When I was given a ride in an old Piper PA-XX many years ago -- with zero taildragger hours under my belt -- I discovered on short final that I WAS FLYING THE PLANE! So, I gave it my best effort (the owner/pilot was pretty old and, looking back, probably sans medical) and we did a little tailwheel tango, ending my ride doing a complete 360 to a full stop.

I prefer to think of it not as a groundloop, but as a "clearing turn in ground effect."

[JonJay]

Originally Posted by N8RV

When I was given a ride in an old Piper PA-XX many years ago -- with zero taildragger hours under my belt -- I discovered on short final that I WAS FLYING THE PLANE! So, I gave it my best effort (the owner/pilot was pretty old and, looking back, probably sans medical) and we did a little tailwheel tango, ending my ride doing a complete 360 to a full stop.

I prefer to think of it not as a groundloop, but as a "clearing turn in ground effect."

I shared my 42' Aeronca L3 with a buddy for about a year. We bought it as student pilots. Our EAA Chapter breakfast is very popular in the summer and the lines for breakfast make great viewing of the runway. He flew to the bkfst, executed a perfect 360 on landing, rolled into the parking area, parked, and proceeded to the breakfast line just like nothing happened. Nobody said a word.
I ground looped it with one of the highest time tailwheel instructors in the area during my training. "Ok, sorry, my fault, I thought you had it all the way, now, check your rudder, all good, lets go...." We flew for another hour or so and I made a few good landings. Later he said he needed to keep me flying after the event otherwise I might not have stepped back into the machine. That poor airplane went through two ground loops, a nose over, and an off field landing all within the first 50 hours we owned it. It went on to put 600 hours in my log book incident free.
I have not even been close to ground looping my 6.

[Alan Carroll]

Originally Posted by Toobuilder

So the "goal" of this is to somehow guide a new builder to making a choice about their airplane based on the probability of it flipping or ground looping?

One of the problems with this comparison is that a ground loop usually makes for a funny story among friends, while the flip makes the evening news.

Good point.

Regardless of its shortcomings, I do think this poll is somewhat useful in making the general point that nose-wheelers are not necessarily safer. This may now seem a foregone conclusion to some, but it certainly wasn't back when I was making the decision. 10+ years ago it was very common to hear the argument that a nose wheel meant easier/safer landings. Tailwheel inherently less stable, etc. Not hearing so much of that since the nosewheel problems began.

[Bill Palmer]

Just my ?2 Cents:?

What percentage of flips, bends, ground loops, or prop strikes are reported or admitted on an open forum? Flips are usually reported separately for insurance reasons, but I?ll bet that a substantial number, if not most, bends, ground loops, and prop strikes are not reported or, particularly, admitted in a public forum. I admire the honesty of those who have responded that they have ground-looped their taildragger or bent their nose gear, but I agree with several others: This poll is simply unrealistic from a data perspective and of virtually no value from a decision perspective.

Bill Palmer

[Ironflight]

Basically, this poll will tell us how many of the respondents fly taildraggers versus how many fly nosedraggers...and anecdotally, will tell us there have been a handful of flips and ground loops. I think we already knew the latter.

Does any of this surprise anyone? Anything new or useful? Next question....

[John Clark]

The methodology is seriously flawed. First, there is no mention of hours flown. The statistic should be expressed in events per XX hours. Second, what defines a "ground loop?" Did the airplane just rotate on the gear, or did it bash a wing on the ground or damage the main gear? Same issue with "bent nosewheel," what does that mean? Somewhere between nicked the rim and flipped the airplane?

So, as Paul said, next question...

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

[RV7AV8R]

Originally Posted by John Clark

The methodology is seriously flawed. First, there is no mention of hours flown. The statistic should be expressed in events per XX hours. Second, what defines a "ground loop?" Did the airplane just rotate on the gear, or did it bash a wing on the ground or damage the main gear? Same issue with "bent nosewheel," what does that mean? Somewhere between nicked the rim and flipped the airplane?

So, as Paul said, next question...

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

I disagree, the poll is what it is. It is not flawed at all, what may be flawed is what one may try to draw from it. It is pilots' disclosed experience not a scientific study. It has about the same validity as the guys at the hangar telling stories of their experiences, only compiled and charted. It seems to be suggesting that maybe RV taildraggers are not so bad. The only people that know for sure are the insurance companies and maybe Vans (and they will not tell). For the rest of us, asking friends or taking polls may be as close as we can get to the truth.

[John Clark]

Originally Posted by RV7AV8R

"It has about the same validity as the guys at the hangar telling stories of their experiences"

I rest my case.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

[flyboy1963]

I like that we are talking about it at all.
the poll could show some more meaningful choices, sure....perhaps it would end up looking like the income tax form!
To further cloud the results, you could ask hours PIC, on type, but this does not measure SKILL, or true aircraft familiarity.
We know some guys who always fly a power-on approach to a 7000' runway, never on grass, solo, no crosswind etc. etc. The first time they need the SKILL to avoid the mysterious oscillation that can cause a bent nosegear, they don't know or have it.
Then there is 'type'. I have a -9a because I am a low-time, infrequent flyer.
If I fly 1000 hours, and then hit an asphalt ridge that flips me, ( the 'not my fault' category) will that show up as statistically different than a poor landing on grass in the first 10 hours that I own the plane?...or to the insurance co?