[Rant Warning] Tailwheel Training

I just came from my flying club's office where I scheduled a plane for
tomorrow (Sunday).
Both of the club's 182 are down for inspections and maintenance after
hard landings. Two weeks ago, the club's Katana went down for the same
reason. Three airplanes in two weeks!!!
What are flight instructors allowing to pass for landings before
signing students off for solo and PPL's for checkouts!!!
If they are not holding the nosewheel off, they are going to break it
off or bend the firewall!!!
This is where tailwheel training comes in.
It's about time the Feds require that all students must spend the first
20 hours of their training in taildraggers. It's the only way they are
going to learn propper control input on landings.

EDR wrote:

It's about time the Feds require that all students must spend the first
20 hours of their training in taildraggers. It's the only way they are
going to learn propper control input on landings.

You can't seriously believe that doing this is going to *reduce* the amount of time
trainers spend in the maintenance shop.

George Patterson
I childproofed my house, but they *still* get in.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...
You can't seriously believe that doing this is going to *reduce* the
amount of time
trainers spend in the maintenance shop.

yup, rudder control learnt in a Cub will do no good to anyone who pulls the
throttle on a 182 over the numbers

HECTOP
PP-ASEL-IA
http://www.maxho.com
maxho_at_maxho.com

In article , G.R. Patterson III
wrote:

EDR wrote:

It's about time the Feds require that all students must spend the first
20 hours of their training in taildraggers. It's the only way they are
going to learn propper control input on landings.

You can't seriously believe that doing this is going to *reduce* the amount
of time
trainers spend in the maintenance shop.

No, I want to weed out the lame instructors!!!

EDR wrote
No, I want to weed out the lame instructors!!!

Then the real solution is to require that in order to instruct, you
have to make 10 solo takeoffs and landings in a tailwheel airplane.
BTW, I favor such a requirement. It's not a hardship to anyone who
has any business instructing.

Michael

"Michael" wrote in message
om...
EDR wrote
No, I want to weed out the lame instructors!!!

Then the real solution is to require that in order to instruct, you
have to make 10 solo takeoffs and landings in a tailwheel airplane.
BTW, I favor such a requirement. It's not a hardship to anyone who
has any business instructing.

And it will provide...what?

"Michael" wrote in message
om...
EDR wrote
No, I want to weed out the lame instructors!!!

Then the real solution is to require that in order to instruct, you
have to make 10 solo takeoffs and landings in a tailwheel airplane.
BTW, I favor such a requirement. It's not a hardship to anyone who
has any business instructing.

Baloney.

By the time instructors met all the additional requirements that you want to
impose on them the cost of becoming an instructor would triple at the least.
They would be no safer nor would they be better pilots in any measurable
sense. The accident rate would not be improved.

Apparently you have some strange idea that good instruction consists of
developing a macho, anti-authority attitude just waiting to get you or
somebody else killed.

I am beginning to believe that you have no business whatsoever near an
airplane.

In article , C J Campbell
wrote:

I am beginning to believe that you have no business whatsoever near an
airplane.

I am having difficulty discerning whether C J is really indignint about
this issue, or he is just baiting us for more so that others may learn.

Let's look at another aspect...
The taildragger (regardless of make/model) requires that the pilot
raise the nose to land (only slightly for wheel landings).
There are tricycle gear aircraft out there with big engines up front
(PA28-235/6, C182, etc) and under light loading conditions (front two
seats occupied, full fuel) the cg is towards the front of the envelope.
If the pilot doesn't learn to get the nose up on landing, the nose gear
and firewall are going to get damaged.
Normally, with no flaps, the nose will come up as the aircraft is
slowed for landing. Now add flaps and the pitch attitude is lowered
(flatter) and the pilot is lulled into the false belief that the nose
is sufficiently high to land on the mains.
Now you have a wheelbarrowing condition, which if the pilot lands too
fast, doesn't flair soon enough or flairs too high will lead to loss of
control and/or damage.
It's about proper piloting technique, it has nothing to do with ego.
(Although, the theory that it makes women's boobs bigger has marketing
potential. ;-))

On Sun, 16 May 2004 01:11:51 GMT, EDR wrote:

I just came from my flying club's office where I scheduled a plane for
tomorrow (Sunday).
Both of the club's 182 are down for inspections and maintenance after
hard landings. Two weeks ago, the club's Katana went down for the same
reason. Three airplanes in two weeks!!!
What are flight instructors allowing to pass for landings before
signing students off for solo and PPL's for checkouts!!!
If they are not holding the nosewheel off, they are going to break it
off or bend the firewall!!!
This is where tailwheel training comes in.
It's about time the Feds require that all students must spend the first
20 hours of their training in taildraggers. It's the only way they are
going to learn propper control input on landings.


I'm sure I'll be in the minority here, but I tend to agee with you. I
worked at an airport that used a Cub as the Primary trainer until
solo. Then the students switched to a 172 for ticket completion (but
could solo the Cub if they wanted). Average was abou 10-12 hours in
the Cub. I have to say some of the best low time Private pilot's I've
known were products of that methodology.

Basics are the best foundation, and an under powered tailwheel
airplane without alot of radios sure does teach the basics of Flight!

z

(Just so you don't think I'm blowing my own horn, I didn't do much
instruction at that time, I mostly watched how the students
progressed.)

I'm sure I'll be in the minority here, but I tend to agee with you. I
worked at an airport that used a Cub as the Primary trainer until
solo. Then the students switched to a 172 for ticket completion (but
could solo the Cub if they wanted). Average was abou 10-12 hours in
the Cub. I have to say some of the best low time Private pilot's I've
known were products of that methodology.

Hampton NH 7B3 still follows this procedure. I suppose that if a
student insisted, he could start out in a Cessna, but of all the
T-shirts I've seen posted over the pasted six years, none has boasted
about soloing in a 172.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! blog www.vivabush.org