Tail wheel vs Nose wheel pros and cons

[akschu]

There is some discussion about STOL and I agree, without bushwheels or extended gear a nosedragger can usually land/takeoff shorter due to AOA. However, STOL is usually worthless unless you are on short grass strip or off airport. In that environment getting the prop out of the grass and protecting against the nose wheel hitting a bump or a hole makes a lot of sense. I nailed a gopher hole in my TW airplane, but the tail wheel just got drug over it.

On sand, dragging the little wheel works better, and let’s not forget about skis and belly pods, which are very common with backcountry aviation.

I guess I’m saying there are lots of reasons for TW for backcountry airplanes, but RV’s aren’t typically backcountry setups, thus, probably doesn’t matter, but for other forms of aviation it makes a huge difference.

 

[rvbuilder2002]

I guess I’m saying there are lots of reasons for TW for backcountry airplanes, but RV’s aren’t typically backcountry setups, thus, probably doesn’t matter, but for other forms of aviation it makes a huge difference.

I agree, but the original start of the takeoff / landing distance discussion/debate was in response to a comment that tail dragger RV's out performed tri gear RV's. Period.

So it was never really about which version was more "STOL".
I also agree with comments that say in practical terms it doesn't really matter... None of us are likely to ever use an RV in such a way that it matters whether the takeoff run is 250 or 300 feet.
But specifications are specifications. They are established by flight testing, not a generalization that all airplanes of a specific type will be the same (such as tail draggers having a shorter takeoff or landing distance than a trigear just because the majority of STOL airplanes tend to be tail draggers).

 

[rv8ch]

The real question is does a tailwheel make my tail look bigger?

I wonder how Paul will answer if Louise asks this question…….

In my limited experience, the only answer to any question like that is "Honey, you always look fantastic!"

 

[Dugaru]

Remarkably, this topic can reliably and readily restart repartee that routinely becomes rancorous.

 

[decathlon737]

I think we need a (conventional) forum and a (A) model forum, obviously we can't coexist.

 

[Roadjunkie1]

I think we need a (conventional) forum and a (A) model forum, obviously we can't coexist.

But wait.........Don't both sides need a worthy opponent?? It is no fun to discuss how much better a tail wheel (or -A) is with someone who thinks the same thing! What fun would that be? That would be everybody standing around nodding and saying Yep.....yep...yep.....

I think it is very interesting to see different perspectives from each side. I do tail wheels because I always have....for several decades! Like from back when Nixon was president!! Do I see the value of nose draggers? Absolutely! But, even in my advancing age, would likely never have one. Well, unless someone came up and said "Here; take it"! My instructor who is in his late 80's doesn't fly as much as he used to but still flies his PA-12 tube-and-fabric taildragger to breakfast at 'the cufAY' at least every Monday! He has been my role model for flying and life in general since I met him all those years ago!

Good move, Paul, to move this to the "Never Ending Debates" forum! And the beat goes on.............

 

[roxiedog13]

But wait.........Don't both sides need a worthy opponent?? It is no fun to discuss how much better a tail wheel (or -A) is with someone who thinks the same thing! What fun would that be? That would be everybody standing around nodding and saying Yep.....yep...yep.....

I think it is very interesting to see different perspectives from each side. I do tail wheels because I always have....for several decades! Like from back when Nixon was president!! Do I see the value of nose draggers? Absolutely! But, even in my advancing age, would likely never have one. Well, unless someone came up and said "Here; take it"! My instructor who is in his late 80's doesn't fly as much as he used to but still flies his PA-12 tube-and-fabric taildragger to breakfast at 'the cufAY' at least every Monday! He has been my role model for flying and life in general since I met him all those years ago!

Good move, Paul, to move this to the "Never Ending Debates" forum! And the beat goes on.............

Arguments aside, this OP did receive the feedback required and after much deliberation, I’ve decided to stick with floats.
I have my (float) plane in the hanger 200 ft away from my home, the two airports options I have are both an hour away, that may very well dictate my decision to be honest. Sure wish I had a runway 200 feet away, I’d have a TW and NW then argue with myself about which one is better.

 

[walkman]

I would agree with practicing. The point is, it doesn't matter whether the plane is a TD or ND; a proficient pilot is a proficient pilot.

Precisely my point

 

[- Poindexter -]

time for a refill…..

 

[docjjrmd]

Aw shucks guys, you just make the argument for having both options like the Sportsman 2+2.... Convertible RV15 ???

 

[DanH]

Agreed Scott - I recently tested two Kitfoxes against each other - one with A 915is, but huge tires, and one with the 916is, but more normal tires. The one with the big tires consistently took off and landed shorter because of the higher angle of attack In ground attitude. basic

That's interesting Paul. Recall when we did those articles on the Super STOL? The factory demo was full throttle, then forward stick, then back stick and snatch the flaps. I didn't say anything, but it just didn't make sense to me. Why so much busy work when the slotted wing should lift off at high AOA with the tailwheel planted?

 

[lr172]

"Honey, you always look fantastic!"

wiser words have never been spoken!!

 

[mfleming]

First rule of operating a tailwheel equipped aircraft -- stay off the binders.
Second rule of operating a tailwheel equipped aircraft -- stay off the binders.

I think that's well intentioned advice and probably true for many new tail wheel pilots. But, I can assure you that during my time flying in the Alaskan bush... I used brakes extensively, off pavement and on. Brakes were just another tool to achieve whatever the aircraft needed at the time.

 

[rvbuilder2002]

That's interesting Paul. Recall when we did those articles on the Super STOL? The factory demo was full throttle, then forward stick, then back stick and snatch the flaps. I didn't say anything, but it just didn't make sense to me. Why so much busy work when the slotted wing should lift off at high AOA with the tailwheel planted?

There is undoubtedly more drag during the takeoff run at higher angles of attack, but it is for such a short period of time, I’ve never been too sure whether there was an actual benefit in lifting the tail to level the aircraft.
I have theorized, though I don’t know much about the subject, that some pilots are doing this in order to have an aggressive rotation for takeoff that induces an acceleration load on the tail spring and tail wheel tire, compressing them beyond the normal static state, in order to increase the angle of attack beyond what would actually be possible Just sitting three-point on the ground.
Maybe someone more knowledgeable can confirm?

 

[akschu]

That's interesting Paul. Recall when we did those articles on the Super STOL? The factory demo was full throttle, then forward stick, then back stick and snatch the flaps. I didn't say anything, but it just didn't make sense to me. Why so much busy work when the slotted wing should lift off at high AOA with the tailwheel planted?

I think the reason is because:

1. Getting the tail up cleans up the airplane considerably and getting the little wheel out of the dirt removes drag.
2. Adding flaps while the wing is into the wind converts the airspeed into lift in a sudden motion that gets the airplane off the ground into ground effect. (thus I think it would't work the same on a low wing)
3. Generally speaking the slats don't do much until you have a very high AOA which would be impossible to achieve on the ground and even in ground effect you couldn't see anything.

In the super cub world the PSTOL flaps cause the airplane to fly much slower without a stupid high AOA so they are preferred over slats which in my opinion don't really add anything to useful airplanes, only those that are in shows. (That said, I'd love to own a Helio with a modern engine.)

I'm not an aero expert nor did I stay in a hotel 6 last night, but I've been around a lot of bushcraft and have a pretty good understanding of their place in the world, and what tends to work. In my 170 using good technique I can be off the ground in 230ft with the flap pull trick. Without it, probably 300, either way it's not ready to actually climb until around the same point, but in ground effect I do build speed much faster which matters when I only have 1000 ft before 120ft tall trees which is common in the PNW.

As for the RV, I don't think TW matters. If you want something that looks better and will hold up to landing on grass better, I think TW is the way to go. If you stick to pavement and are more worried about insurance rates, then nosedragger. For the high wing bushplanes that actually land off airport, the tailwheel is much much better.

 

[Chino Tom]

The only disadvantage of the nose dragger is having to crawl under the wing to do main gear maintenance