Which taildragger

They each handle a little diferently on the ground and during that very
short critical time of not quite enough speed to fly but plenty to
ground loop!
I'd opt for the Decathalon for openers, and get time in all of them to
find out for yourself which you prefer. Certainly get the spin
training, invaluable experience no matter what you end up flying.
aerobatics ditto.
Have fun!! where are you flying in SoCal? If anywhere near Santa Paula
I HIGHLY recommend Rich Stowell for primary aerobatics.
Fly safe
Rocky

wrote in message
ups.com...
I HIGHLY recommend Rich Stowell for primary aerobatics.
Fly safe
Rocky

So do I!
DH

wrote:

Have fun!! where are you flying in SoCal? If anywhere near Santa Paula
I HIGHLY recommend Rich Stowell for primary aerobatics.
Fly safe
Rocky

I'm in the San Fernando Valley and have not made a flight since
arriving. That's only been a few days. There are several
airports closer than Santa Paula but I'll stop by when I get a chance.

xxx wrote:
So here I am in sunny (OK, heavy marine layer overcast) southern
California. Always looking for interesting/stupid/expensive
things to do, I see that there are a lot of outfits here offering
taildragger instruction, some aerobatic, some spin training,
some just tailwheel endorsements.

They use a variety of aircraft: Cubs, Aeroncas, Decathalon and
more.

Is there a significant difference between these different airplanes
when it comes to the initial learning about handling a taildragger?

Others have discussed the aircraft. I'll put in a plug for Sunrise
Aviation down at John Wayne. They have four Decathlons, a Citabria,
2 holer Pitts and an Extra 300. More importantly, I thought the
instruction I got there last year during an aerobatic refresher was
first rate. (Nice web site, too.)

Have fun with whatever you choose, rick

Is there a significant difference between these different airplanes
when it comes to the initial learning about handling a taildragger?

There are differences. What you would consider significant is another
matter. Let's just say that in my opinion that wouldn't be the most
important factor.

If at all possible, pick the one that allows you to solo. If you have
a choice, choose the one that allows solo with the most reasonable
minimums.

Those operations that can get insurance for solo rentals with
reasonable minima have a proven track record for teaching pilots the
things they need to know to operate a tailwheel airplane without
wrecking it. Insurance companies are far from perfect, but they have a
way better idea of what qualified instructor means than the FAA does,
and having no other information, you're way better off going with their
judgment than not. Way more important than the difference between the
various little taildraggers.

Michael

Michael wrote:


If at all possible, pick the one that allows you to solo. If you have
a choice, choose the one that allows solo with the most reasonable
minimums.
Michael

Good point. I will see if any of them allows solo rental. It could turn
out that they will all be like the sea plane operations: get the rating
and that's the end, not the beginning.

I'm surprised at how heavy and persistent the marine layer has been
since
I've arrived here. It seems the first thing will be learning to
actually
use my instrument ticket to get in and out of the valley.

Depends what you want. I've had a Decathlon, Cub, and Aeroca Chief.
At this point if I were in the market for another tailwheel, I'd
probably go for the Aeronca. Why? It was just a fun plane. The
Decathlon was too modern. Full electrical system electrical starter,
radios, etc just takes a bit of the tailwheel fun out of it for me. The
Cub looked good on the ground but honestly, it flys like an old Ford
pickup truck sucking up any little bit of turb it can find. There isn't
much hands off flying in the J-3. The PA-18 I flew was much nicer
though.

-Robert