Tailwheel

On Wednesday, December 12, 2012 3:08:18 PM UTC-5, Bill D wrote:
Geez, more negative experts!

Did you consider there are REASONS for the current designs ?

...Blanik's are taildraggers and many have permanently
castering tail wheels so it can't be a big deal.

Blaniks and SGS gliders have little in common with modern high
performance gliders, where the rudder has limited effectiveness
until higher speed. A fixed or steerable tailwheel and a
HEAVY tail weight make cross-wind operation safer in modern
gliders.

On Wednesday, December 12, 2012 3:24:45 PM UTC-7, Dave Nadler wrote:
On Wednesday, December 12, 2012 3:08:18 PM UTC-5, Bill D wrote:

Geez, more negative experts!



Did you consider there are REASONS for the current designs ?

Sure, they're cheap. No other reason.

Blaniks and SGS gliders have little in common with modern high

performance gliders, where the rudder has limited effectiveness

until higher speed.

SGS and Blaniks have little in common with each other so which example are you using? Blanik's have adequate rudder authority but nothing exceptional.. I'd guess my Nimbus has more.

The survey showed most empty tail dragger gliders have about 75 lbs on the tail wheel. Setting the locking spring at 10 pounds less would prevent bumps and tail-first landings from unlocking it in all but the most extreme cases. But, if you're still worried and a latching down-lock doesn't tickle your fancy, a simple air damper that required the full empty load to be applied for a few seconds for it to unlock would cover both possibilities.

More expensive? Sure, but not nearly as much as the cost of a tail dolly. Heavier? A little, but not nearly as heavy as the brass tail wheels in common use. Complex? You're kidding, right? We're talking of a spring on a sliding shaft with a locking detent. That's about half as complicated as a tail dolly which has to be installed, removed and kept track of. I've seen tow out bars which don't use a tail dolly.