Ricky wrote in
:

On Jan 26, 2:11*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
.
Find a Great Lakes or a Citabria. The tailwheel experience will teach
you
a
lot as well.

Bertie-

Among the three part 141 schools I went to, Le Tourneau University was
the best. I went there with my commercial / instrument in hand,
preparing to go through CFII, multi & A&P. The high quality, serious
level of instruction at Le Tourneau quickly overwhelmed me as did the
huge expense of this small, private, Christian school. I had to leave
after one semester because I simply couldn't afford it. I was also
quite the irresponsible idiot at the time who'd rather play than
study, so the caliber of instruction at Le Tourneau was something I
could not handle.

I did, however, get my checkout in their Citabria which they used for
tailwheel training and spins for the CFI candidates. We were not
allowed to do aerobatics in the Citabria or fly solo, but it remains
some of the best training and most rewarding flying I've done. The
Citabria was loads of fun and I caught on really fast. In an hour I
was doing it all alone, including wheelies and 3 pointers. Far too
many schools don't offer tailwheel checkouts, at Le Tourneau it was
required for graduation, as was a landing at DFW in an Archer or Arrow
(and the landing fee came out of YOUR pocket). BTW the Warriors,
Archers & Arrows were all air conditioned at Le Tourneau which was
great in the Texas Summer!

The suggestion for aerobatic instruction is well-received and when I
can afford it, I'll do it. My short term plan at the moment is to
finish my A&P and 2 yr. degree, get a job and then jump back into
flight instruction, finishing my flight degree started long ago and
getting my CFII & multi. TSTC has an above-average rating among those
I've talked with so I'm anticipating good instruction. It will take a
while to get up to snuff on my commercial / instrument before
progressing into CFI. There are many places in the DFW area (bit over
an hour drive north) offering aerobatic instruction and I even know
one or two locally.

You said the Pitts was "easy," implying the Citabria was not as easy?
I got the impression in my 10 or so hours in the Citabria that it was
a pretty easy airplane to fly & land. Did you mean it's a bit
challenging for aerobatics, moreso than a Pitts?


Yes, exactly, The Pitts is a lot more difficult to land than the
Citabria. I've only flown two easier taildraggers than a Citabria and
that's the Hatz and the Aeronca Sedan. And mabye a Taylorcraft.

My dad built a Pitts in the 70s and sold it within a year because he
didn't like the way it flew. I was just a wee lad but I seem to
remember his not liking the speed and instability, and he had little
interest in aerobatics. So he took it to a few airshows and won awards
for quality of construction, finish and decor and then sold it after
spending over 5 years building the thing. He really loved working on
planes as much as flying them & was a perfectionist.


Yeah, I've flown two in my early years and found them a handful then,
probably wouldn't find them so much of a handful now, but thye do keep
your attentin on the ground.
The problem with them doing rolls in particualr is all you really have
to do to do a passable roll is slap the sick to the side and it will go
around. Doing them in a Citabria requires you to do everything right or
it's a bi tof a mess. Bipes are better becasue they're stringer and
draggier and if you **** up you have a far greater margin than you would
in a Citabria or Decathlon. That's why I suggested the Great Lakes.



Bertie