[RV8R999]

Preparing for my RV8 first flight (perhaps this weekend). What are your thoughts on the the two types of landings in the RV8?

I'm not asking about short-field technique. For the test phase I'll be flying from a paved runway of 6500ft in length.

For those who've flown the RV6 and the RV8 how do they compare during landings?

Thanks!

Ken

 

[n5lp]

Preparing for my RV8 first flight (perhaps this weekend). What are your thoughts on the the two types of landings in the RV8?...

I don't fly an 8 but I have been on this forum long enough to know one of the very few things there seems to be a pretty much consensus on is that 8s like wheel landings. I still don't really understand why.

 

[sf3543]

I prefer the 3 pt for 1st flights

I have built and owned both an RV6 and RV8.
For the first flight I would always recommend the 3 pt landing. It typically provides a slower gentler approach and touchdown which should be easier to control.
Having said that, after the first few landings, I did mostly make tail low wheel landings in both aircraft.
Good luck on your first flight.

 

[Ironflight]

Hi Ken,

AS Larry pointed out (and there are NUMEROUS threads on the topic of landing -8's), the airplane really likes a tail-low wheel landing best of all. In the three point attitude, the airframe is still flying, so if you are three-pointing it, you are doing a very precise three-wheel landing. If you try to full-stall it, you'll be doing a one-pointer, then dropping the mains to earth, leading to a fairly nice bounce.

Yes, the airplane can be three-pointed, and I have a lot of respect for Steve's opinions as well. I often three-point if I am flying to short fields, but with plenty of runway, I find that the wheelie is easier to get right. Most of the high-time -8 guys have found this to be true over the years.

I flew the first flight in my -8 almost 5 years ago, and I targeted a tail-low wheelie - worked out just fine. I know you have plenty of flight test experience - fly what feels comfortable - you just have more margin for error with the wheel landing on this airplane.

Paul

 

[N427EF]

First off, congratulations on completing an RV-8.
This is not advice just my observations and experience in the RV-8 as well as
landing and taking off in many different airplanes as a former parachute jumper pilot.
As of today I have 440 hrs in the RV-8 and about as many in other tail wheel aircraft such as Cessna 180, L19 bird dog, Beech-18, Pilatus Porter, Citabria Champ and others, so I do have some good comparison of how an RV-8 likes to land.
I hope you will take some transition training before you make your first flight and follow the advice of the flight instructor giving you that training.

I find that the RV-8 will land nicely in a 3 point attitude if you employ good airspeed control. In other words, if you line up for a 3 point landing at a speed much above stall you will bounce, not only, but now you will bounce with the nose high and loose sight of the runway. Depending on your corrections you can certainly recover from this. Once the aircraft is planted on the runway it is certainly more easily controlled with all three wheels on the ground.
Setting up for a wheel landing affords you a little better visibility and even though speed control is equally important the inevitable bounce resulting from too high an airspeed will result in a level bounce which seems less dramatic than the jump back in the air from a three point attitude.
I always land tail low in a three point attitude but I find that the transition from a level attitude to the three point attitude requires a good feel for the aircraft.
To sum it up: The RV-8 is very controllable and responsive for landings in all sorts of conditions. For good landings you must have good airspeed control and properly use your ailerons into the wind.

 

[RV8R999]

Thanks guys! I had Jan Bussell provide transition training in his RV6 just a few weeks ago in Southern Florida. In his RV6 I found the wheel landings to be completely natural and nailed them from the beginning. Especially in the side-by-side I enjoyed having the expanded Field Of View (FOV) with a more level attitude on touch down. I was able to 3-pt his plane but this required much higher workload I thought.

My 8 has a solid link instead of T/W chains so I expect it to be bit more responsive than Jan's 6 was with chains. I also have an after-market T/W assembly which raises the tail a couple of inches.

I taxied the plane around the airport yesterday (boy was it hard resisting the urge to go flying!) and based on my sitting eye position was able to see pretty well forward of the plane with only the top few inches of the cowl blocking my FOV. I found the -6's FOV much more restrictive mostly because of the side-by-side configuration. I didn't add extensions to the pedals but can tell I probably will eventually mostly for the added feel of something firmly below the balls of my feet when using rudder only. As it is, there is a slight sensation of maybe slipping off the pedal during a hard turn without brakes.

Coming from mostly a nose wheel background (except the Helicopters I fly all have T/Ws but the FAA doesn't count those for some reason ) I was super impressed with how tightly I can turn on the ground. I love not having to use brakes when taxiing like I did with my last plane.

I'll plan on wheelies for first several flights.

Even though I wasn't flying and just taxiing does the RV grin still count?


PS. Just in case you were wondering.. a helicopter, especially an H-60 behaves remarkably similar to a T/W fixed wing when conducting what we call running landings (usually about 50 kts)...the CG is aft of the mains just like in a fixed wing and if not careful you'll be off the side of the runway in a hurry. In fact we have to be careful not to roll the helo over sideways since our CG is near the top of the fuse.

 

[Andy Hill]

Just to add one aspect, apart form the obvious considerations (runway length / surface type / how rough), CG is a significant factor in an RV-8. Solo wheelers are easy, but with a heavy backseater, the 3 point becomes as easy, if not easier for some. Wheelers also like partial flap I find (less rudder blanking).

For a 1st flight I tend towards the 3 point though, and ballast the aircraft with the CG somewhat rear, just to reduce the issues if there is a swing / shimmy / wheel / brake dragging issue i.e. minimise G/S on touchdown. And hence of course Full Flap...

Andy

 

[RV8R999]

An aft CG seems counterintuitive for setting up a landing with the goal of having less workload as it is the CG aft of the mains which makes T/W landings different and more challenging from nose wheel airplanes. I can understand the stick force will be less during the transition to 3-pt attitude though.. I guess the best way to find out is to do it.

But yes, I agree with the bigger picture in that due to the tandem configuration, the CG will change significantly with addition of a pax, which necessitates learning to fly the airplane throughout its entire CG range.

Thanks for the inputs!!!
Ken

 

[lucky]

Preparing for my RV8 first flight (perhaps this weekend). What are your thoughts on the the two types of landings in the RV8?

I'm not asking about short-field technique. For the test phase I'll be flying from a paved runway of 6500ft in length.

For those who've flown the RV6 and the RV8 how do they compare during landings?

Thanks!

Ken

Just do the tail low, main wheel landings and you won't have to bother wasting your time worring about a non-nominal landing. In the 8, in a forward CG configuration, it's how the 8 wants to land. In the 6/7, it's the opposite feeling - they just love a 3 pointer and a wheel landing seems like more work for the plane and pilot.

 

[Andy Hill]

Ken...

An aft CG seems counterintuitive for setting up a landing with the goal of having less workload as it is the CG aft of the mains which makes T/W landings different and more challenging from nose wheel airplanes

Sorry - might have not been clear...

I don't ballast a 1st flight "to make the landing easy". I ballast the aircraft for a 1st flight to get as mid CG range as possible - just good practice. There are all sorts of various issues (incorrect CG / weighing, aerodynamics) that suggests not exploring the CG envelope too closely at the 1st flight. A solo RV-8 with no (rear) baggage is getting about as far forward as you are likely to get

Andy

 

[RV8R999]

except a fwd CG is more stable (statically anyway) and unless there is evidence of marginal elevator authority this is actually smart flight test to start fwd and work backwards in CG - especially if this is considered a primary and mission relevant configuration. Since this by no means can be considered developmental test (the design is well proven) no need to butt up against the fwd edge but shouldn't need to avoid being much more fwd than aft of the CG envelope. If on the other hand, this was the prototype of a new design, still in development, it would make sense to start closer to the center of the DESIGN CG and then expand from there in both directions during test.

I'm going with the CG as it will be solo with half tanks of fuel for first flight and will plan on wheelies (tail low or however the first one ends up)..mostly I just want to track straight down the runway independent of the landing


Ken

 

[Neal@F14]

FWIW, I'm a newbie at flying the RV-8 (~ 20 hours) and at flying RVs in general (just under 50 hours total RV time), with most of my RV time logged in an RV-4. I found the -8 to three-point just fine when I had a 200lb passenger in the back seat, but solo, I stuck to doing ordinary standard straight-up wheel landings. It worked just fine, as I took a friend's brand new RV-8 to Oshkosh and back last month, and brought it back home in one piece

I've only flown an RV-6 once and found it to be the more difficult one to land of the three TW RV models I've flown (-4,-6,-8) and the -8 being the easiest, so if you can make pretty wheel landings in the -6, then the -8 ought to be a total piece of cake for you.

BTW, the -8 I flew also had the one-armed "Rocket Link" on the tailwheel, and it sure does make the tailwheel steering very nice and precise.

 

[lancef53]

I did my transition in a 6, and found it slightly more difficult to land than my 8 is. I agree with most, the wheel landing is the most comfortable in the 8. I also have a aftermarket tailwheel (aviation products), and that makes three point landings a little more difficult.

Another vote for the tail low wheel landing!!

 

[Andy Hill]

Ken... You clearly have strong views on how to do the first flight, and not too interested in contrary opinions I disagree with some of what you say, but who am I...

My final comment will be with reference to

especially if this is considered a primary and mission relevant configuration

and

this is actually smart flight test to start fwd and work backwards in CG

Many do not consider the 1st flight as part of the flight testing / data gathering process. Yes - the design is well proven, but this particular aircraft has lots of unknowns inherent in "amateur build" and the flexibility we have as home builders to "interpret" and deviate from the plans. The 1st flight should be a short pure "does it fly" with all parameters as "safe" and "conservative" as possible.

Assuming 1st flight and post flight inspection(s) are all satis, then the Flight Testing, or in our case more "shakedown" flying begins

Andy

PS One other

except a fwd CG is more stable (statically anyway) and unless there is evidence of marginal elevator authority

I don't find the stability a factor. However, marginal elevator and trim authority on landing are a charateristic of a solo RV-8 - as any search of this forum would show. A wheeler landing gets round some of that, but IMHO still leaves you (unnecessarily) exposed if there is any difference in what you are flying to what you were planning to fly.

 

[skylor]

First Flight Ballast

except a fwd CG is more stable (statically anyway) and unless there is evidence of marginal elevator authority this is actually smart flight test to start fwd and work backwards in CG - especially if this is considered a primary and mission relevant configuration. )
Ken

For what it's worth Mike Seager, arguably the most experienced RV pilot on the planet, recommended I put 50 pounds or so ballast in the baggage compartment for the first flight. My configuration is IO-360 angle valve with a Hartzell C/S BA prop. This does improve elevator authority for landings, especially 3 points. My plane had plenty of pitch stability in this configuration.

Skylor
RV-8
Flying @ 40 hours

 

[RV8R999]

The flight testing process began the instant I started building the airplane. I'll be posting my formal test plan here in a few days but rest assured the very first flight is in fact part of my test process. Data both quantitative and qualitative will be collected. The tasks will be benign and limited to basic handling qualities evaluations. Verifying basic stability (phugoid, short period, Dihedral Effect, LDO, Dutch roll) and a qualitative assessment of control authority and harmony provide important insight needed to predict behavior during landings. Qualitatively these tests can be done in about 20 minutes if you know how and what to look for. Engine parameters willing my first flight will last about 1.5 hours.

The fact I started this thread implies I do in fact value the opinions of those more experienced in this model but in no way invalidates my own experiences, training and education. Sound principles of flight test apply regardless of the experience level of the testers involved.

If I doubted the plane would fly during the first flight, I wouldn't attempt to fly it. I'd first eliminate the source of the doubt.

Anyway...I've gotten what I need from this thread and appreciate all the inputs.

Ken

 

[Laser]

Newbie Point of view.

I am dangerously self taught and my RV-8 is my first tailwheel airplane and I flew it solo for the first time so this is a true green horn point of view. My first 10 or so landings were on a paved 2800ft x 75ft rwy and so I landed three-point with full flap. I am a jet guy so 2800ft is very short for me!! I found it quite squirrely and had small yet controllable bounces and swerves on most of my landings. I found the three point doable but it really needs to be greased on and perfectly straight.

I tried wheel-landings for the first time a few weeks back on a longer runway and I am totally sold. I now wheel land on my 2800ft strip with ease. I find it much easier to control. My thought is that with only the mains on the rwy, you don't need to be as perfectly straight as you do three-pointing. Bounces are much less frequent for me. I will continue to three-point for practice and for when I need the short rwy landings. I set up 75mph/half flap and land tail low wheel landings. I find the gear legs stiff and fast landings can be bouncers.

I totally agree with all of Paul Dye's comments.

 

[AirbusPilot]

Hi Ken,

I have flown my RV-8 for about 70 hours, I was very worry about first flight because I haven't flown to much hours in a tail dragger before(15 hours max. in 10 years) and didn't know how to land on wheels

So I flew my 8 and found is the easier tail dragger to taxi, takeoff and land, I started using the tail low technics for landing but that come natural, now I can do wheels, 3 point and tail low landing, never has a problem landing the plane. Yes I have expirience some small bouncing but you will be able to manage them very easy.

If you have some expirience with another tail dragger, you will be fine in the 8. For example I don't feel safe with my taildragger expirience in a Cub or Champ but I feel absolutely safe flying and landing my 8 even on cross winds

One more thing, I will advice you to use 80 knots for aproach, that is a little high but with a long runway and for first fly that will be ok. Once you have confortable with your landings reduce speed to 70 knots on final.

Just my to cents!!!

 

[RV8R999]

thanks guys!

I now have two landings in my RV8. One wheelie and one 3-pt. Although not even close to enough info to form any valid opinion, the wheelie was much easier. I used full flaps and 80mph for both and idle power. Next time I'm going with 20 deg, 80mph and idle power. My CG is well fwd.

Ken

 

[Andy Hill]

Ken...

If conditions permit/encourage me to do a wheeler (solo, long hard runway, x-wind) I tend to use ~1/2 flap. I think I was "taught" this as well since it gives you less rudder blanking (?).

V-V if 3 pointing, I use Full Flap.

Just to confuse the issue more

ATB
Andy

 

[RV8R999]

Andy - Yes I can understand 1/2 flaps working a little better. It did on the -6 I flew. Now if I can solve my high CHT issue I'll go out and get some landings done!