On Jul 13, 11:07 pm, "Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote:
"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in 8.18...





Maybe, but if the braking you have is sufficient to get the airplane's
tail up in the three point attitude, then the co-efficient of braking is
enough to rotate the airplane around the main wheels in either case. If
this is so, then thee is no more braking available anywa.
In the wheel landing scenario, there is more of the airplane on the
wrong side of the deceleration vector than there is in the three point
attitude. Simply put, you tip the airplane forward enough and the thing
will nose over by itself. And you're not too far from that tipping point
in a nose low attitude even with the aircraft static with many
taildraggers. This limits the amount of brake you may apply nose low
since the only thing acting against your braking is the horizontal stab
and whatever tiny bit of work gravty is accomplishing over deceleration.
In the 3 point attitude this vector is altered considerably, and more
brake can be applied than in the nose low scenario, providing the Cf is
enough and the brakes themselves are powerful enough, to raise the tail
from three point. In my experience, it usually is. If the surface is
slimy, like wet grass, applying more downforce will only increase the Cf
appreciably if you are managing to dig a few ruts!
This is the way I see it, but the proof is in the pudding. I'll just
have to try t at the next opportunity and decide for myself.

Bertie

You're totally full of ****.

And you repeatedly demonstrate yourself to be a moron. At least MX
provides humor for the rest of us, you're a waste of bandwidth.