Ground loop vs Bent nose wheel

[RV7AV8R]

On a different thread these issues were argued and I thought gee we have the data in our own experience. So lets take a pole and compare hours vs ground loops in tail draggers and hours vs bent nose gear in A models.
If I can make the poll work.
Edit, I couldn't do it vs hours so it is in the form of "have you ever?"

 

[CZ75shooter]

A Model

I have flown a 9-A 900 hrs. and a 7-A 60 hrs. off a grass strip, both old style nose gear. (Knock on wood,) no problems so far.
Larry

 

[RV7AV8R]

It is interesting that there are about 50/50 nose vs tail wheels (at least among those answering the survey), but that seems about right. It is also interesting that either incedence is turning out low considering the nature of the question being "have you ever..?" Note that you can click more than one answer, so if you have had both types you can still fill out the survey. To be useful we probably need about 100 respondants, the more we get the more valuable the data.

 

[RV7AV8R]

Many are looking at this Poll and not voting, why? We are not tracking who votes how so there is nothing to be worried or embarrassed about. Of course, don't vote if you are not flying yet. It is interesting how rare these events are!

 

[Brent Colvin]

I replaced my tail wheel springs with Darwin's tail wheel link from JD Air. Great product, improves ground handling greatly. My 7 was easy to land, but it is even easier now.

 

[Russ McCutcheon]

Many are looking at this Poll and not voting, why? We are not tracking who votes how so there is nothing to be worried or embarrassed about. Of course, don't vote if you are not flying yet. It is interesting how rare these events are!

It?s not useful with ought hours of operation, a guy that had an accident might have flown 2 hours or 4000 hours, same for the guys that had no accents.

1100 RV hours mostly in my -4 but some in two other -4s and one landing in a -7A, no problems.

 

[Sunriver Ken]

[QUOTE It is also interesting that either incedence is turning out low considering the nature of the question being "have you ever..?" [/QUOTE]

Per the data when I looked at it, about 4% of nose gear RV fliers had experienced a bent nose gear. This does not seem "low" to me. It seems etremely high. What do you think the number would be if you asked Cessna, Piper or Bechcraft owners the same question? My guess is less than 1%.

 

[cbo111]

Unreliable polls

[QUOTE It is also interesting that either incedence is turning out low considering the nature of the question being "have you ever..?"

Thats because polls like this are not reliable enough to produce accurate results. These types of polls tend to not interest folks who have never had a problem or accident. You end up getting a lot of input from folks who are passionate because they have had problems in the past. Thats not to say the results are useless. But they should not be taken as valid for decision-making.

 

[RV7AV8R]

It?s not useful with ought hours of operation, a guy that had an accident might have flown 2 hours or 4000 hours, same for the guys that had no accents.

1100 RV hours mostly in my -4 but some in two other -4s and one landing in a -7A, no problems.

Originally I tried to set up the poll the way you suggest but couldn't figure out how to do that given the way these polls work. So, we just have to take the limitataions of this poll method into account when processing the information we get from it.

 

[N427EF]

ground loops

It's unlikely that anyone is going to admit to a ground loop on a public forum.
After all, you cannot blame the tail wheel design for a ground loop incident.
Personally I know of 2 bent main gears due to the fact that the tail wheel wanted to be up front upon landing.

 

[RV7AV8R]

It's unlikely that anyone is going to admit to a ground loop on a public forum.
After all, you cannot blame the tail wheel design for a ground loop incident.
Personally I know of 2 bent main gears due to the fact that the tail wheel wanted to be up front upon landing.

There is no publication of how anyone votes or even if they vote so no way to be embarrased. About 100 have voted, about 800 have viewed. The more that vote, the more useful the data. I am assuming pilots are honest so it should be useful for what it is.

 

[ExtraKatana]

Insurance

What are the difference in premium differences when comparing conventional gear vs. Nose Wheel with the insurance companies ??

 

[Sid Lambert]

What are the difference in premium differences when comparing conventional gear vs. Nose Wheel with the insurance companies ??

None .............................

 

[DanWright]

What do you think the number would be if you asked Cessna, Piper or Beechcraft owners the same question? My guess is less than 1%.

A better group would be Grumman AA series pilots. As one who has flown them for many years...never a problem. Then again, though admittedly with much fewer hours, I have never ground looped a tail dragger (yet).

 

[Bevan]

Many are looking at this Poll and not voting, why?

Because many are still building and not yet flying an RV, and/or trying to decide if there's any useful info here to decide which to build, and/or to validate a choice already made. Others?

Basically there's no box to check for my situation, and yet I have viewed this thread twice already.

Bevan
RV7A wiring (coming along nicely)

 

[whitewulfe]

Many are looking at this Poll and not voting, why? We are not tracking who votes how so there is nothing to be worried or embarrassed about. Of course, don't vote if you are not flying yet. It is interesting how rare these events are!

I look as I'm curious as to what people have been saying, and haven't replied as I have not yet had a chance to work on my PPL yet.

 

[Alan Carroll]

Interesting

An interesting poll even if not perfectly accurate (are these polls ever?). Although it doesn't incorporate hours flown, the question of simple occurrence is reasonable to ask. If I ground loop my airplane I'm not going to care how many hours of cross-country passed before I did so.

 

[John R. Graham]

I can't vote because my RV-7 is way away from being finished, but virtually all my time is in conventional gear: Cessna 170B with a sprinkling of Citabria and Cub time. No ground loops. A fair amount of my 170 time is off of a grass strip, too.

- John

 

[Sam Buchanan]

why?

I've looked a couple of times but can't figure out how this poll would yield any useful info............but you did get me to look.

 

[RV7AV8R]

I've looked a couple of times but can't figure out how this poll would yield any useful info............but you did get me to look.

The opinions about which is "better" are usually strongly held and verbalized often. Usually the fear of a TD is the ground loop and the current fear of a NG is bending the gear etc. Other than opinions there isn't much data that a new builder can use to help make a decision. It occurred to me that those of us flying have the data in our collective experience. I hope it is useful, but I find it interesting also. I don't know anyone who has ground looped an RV and wondered how real that fear was, this gave me the idea of the poll.
Note that the percents shown are confusing and not too useful, you have to look at the two groups independently to get proper percents of respondants.

 

[Toobuilder]

...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]

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]

Funny!

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]

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]

Questionable

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]

Try again...

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]

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]

Validity

"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]

more choices could be meaningful

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?

 

[1:1 Scale]

The methodology is seriously flawed. First, there is no mention of hours flown. The statistic should be expressed in events per XX hours.

As someone mentioned earlier, what does hours flown have to do with the occurance of ground handling incidents? Are we talking about PIC hours, or hours on the aircraft? If you want to make the data more "accurate", it should be based on the number take offs and landings, not hours flown.

I find the poll interesting, but take it with a grain of salt. It's surely not a master's thesis

 

[John Clark]

Time

As someone mentioned earlier, what does hours flown have to do with the occurance of ground handling incidents? Are we talking about PIC hours, or hours on the aircraft? If you want to make the data more "accurate", it should be based on the number take offs and landings, not hours flown.

I find the poll interesting, but take it with a grain of salt. It's surely not a master's thesis

You are right, comparing the incidents to the number of take off/landings would be good. Also, a breakdown of pilot time, total and in type, would be interesting.

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