Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:15 PM - Re: Taildraggers forever....... (Laurie Hoffman)
2. 06:14 PM - Re: Taildraggers forever....... (Brian Whittingham)
3. 06:25 PM - Re: Taildraggers forever....... (Dave)
4. 06:45 PM - Re: Taildraggers forever....... (N1BZRich@aol.com)
5. 07:02 PM - Input on Lightning Tailwheel Aircraft (Brian Whittingham)
6. 07:59 PM - Re: Lightning Operating Manual (nick otterback)
7. 08:33 PM - Lightning Tailwheel Pic (Brian Whittingham)
8. 09:31 PM - Re: Taildraggers forever....... (Bill)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Taildraggers forever....... |
Hi All,
There have been excellent overviews of tail dragger vs
'nose dragger' posted by buz, nick and others which
really summarise everything important about the
comparison. Horses for courses really as has been so
well outlined. Thats the great thing about
flying...you can select from such a huge range of
types, performance, configuration and operating and
construction costs.
In one post there was reference to the increased risk
posed by taildraggers at the end of a long day due
fatigue. Reading the comments about how tail draggers
require the pilot to think more, work a little harder
and remain at a higher level of conditions awareness
near the ground, brought back memories of some
thousands of tows in Super Cub, Pawnee and Calair
glider tugs. As most often the only rostered pilot for
the day it was not uncommon for that to entail 20-30
flights and on rarer occasions 30-40.
This tended to hone one's focus on each and every
approach. Even though increasingly tired as the day
progressed it was surprising at how little the quality
of the landings deteriorated. I put this down to the
currency and recency aspects but more so to the
heightened awareness of wind conditions and
preparedness for any cross wind influence. in other
words, the taildragger extracted a high level of
performance from a very average pilot.
I dont know about licencing in the US but in Oz,
sperate licences are required for the two
configurations. Having experienced that challenge,
nose draggers tend to land more automatically and just
dont provide as much satisfaction. Actually achieving
a comfort level in tail draggers by getting enough
consolidated experience under your belt is the greater
challenge. Once there though, its great fun.
On nother matters, Brian was kind enough to email me
the flight manual (June 06) for the Lightening that
Buz developed. Conratulations on such a highly
readable, informative and logically set out piece of
writing.
Also, now that there are quite a few Lightnings
airborne, would operators mind posting some achieved
data on cruise economy and performance?
Laurie
Sydney
--- N1BZRich@aol.com wrote:
> Doug wrote - "Somehow looks, lighter weight,
> slightly better performance can
> seem less important when you have lost control of
> your bird and are awaiting
> an impact with a non-runway environment."
>
> Ops, sounds like you might be one of those "half
> empty glass" guys (verses
> half full) that has already decided he is going to
> ground loop eventually.
> Kind of like those that say if you haven't landed
> gear up, you eventually will.
> I am more of a positive thinker and believe that
> "PPPPPP" - prior planning
> prevents piss poor performance. At any rate,
> differences of opinions is what
> makes horse races - and my horse is faster than
> yours. :-)
> Blue Skies,
> Buz
>
> PS: No, I don't really have a horse, but I do have
> 400 of them under the
> hood. Did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last
> night.
>
>
>
> http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
>
Laurie
02 46531233
0425 703226
Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the
Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Taildraggers forever....... |
Laurie,
Here in the United States, you don't have a liscense for a tailwheel
airplane, but rather an instructor sign off that says that you had ground
and flight instruction. Liscenses in the United States are Private Pilot,
Commercial Pilot, and Airline Transport Pilot. Ratings, in which you
recieve an addition to your ticket are Instrument, Multi-Engine. All your
instructor ratings are on a seperate ticket and are also considered ratings.
Sign-offs include high performance (greater than 200 hp engine), high
altitude for anything with a cieling that is rated higher than 25,000 feet,
Tailwheel, spins (not that you can't do them, but spin awareness is required
before the checkride for flight instructors), and complex aircraft with
constant speed props and retractable gear.
As far as if taildraggers are safer than nosedraggers....
I think that we can only compare apples and oranges here. Basically, it's
not a hot topic anymore since most new aircraft have nosewheels. It's not a
major killing point of pilots like weather is. I think that the only thing
that we can really say for sure is that a tailwheel version of the same
aircraft with the same pilot will cost more in insurance. It is because of
accident rates, but the way that insurance works is simply saying, ok,
there's more accidents. This doesn't take currency into account, total time
(not saying that won't make it cheaper on you), or anything like that, but
simply more landing and takeoff bumps & bruises.
My wife's grandfather was in the Army Air Corp in WWII. They would
typically solo tailwheel airplanes as little as 1-3 hours, that's total
time, not just tailwheel! Sure, there was a fair share of accidents, but I
think you'd find after they had about 10-15 hours of tailwheel time those
accident rates nearly disappeared. The key here is currency, military
currency, which most of us don't know how nice that is. It also depends on
the plane. Planes that have a long distance from the CG to the tail, planes
that have a high horsepower and low weight, or a lot of side area to the
tail. For instance, a DC-3 in a 15 knot crosswind is just too much, in a
citabria I can handle it all day long.
In summary, Pilots should either, Be Good, Be Current, or Be Lucky, and that
goes for both tailwheel and trigear pilots. Brian W.
From: Laurie Hoffman <lozhoffman@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Taildraggers forever.......
Hi All,
There have been excellent overviews of tail dragger vs
'nose dragger' posted by buz, nick and others which
really summarise everything important about the
comparison. Horses for courses really as has been so
well outlined. Thats the great thing about
flying...you can select from such a huge range of
types, performance, configuration and operating and
construction costs.
In one post there was reference to the increased risk
posed by taildraggers at the end of a long day due
fatigue. Reading the comments about how tail draggers
require the pilot to think more, work a little harder
and remain at a higher level of conditions awareness
near the ground, brought back memories of some
thousands of tows in Super Cub, Pawnee and Calair
glider tugs. As most often the only rostered pilot for
the day it was not uncommon for that to entail 20-30
flights and on rarer occasions 30-40.
This tended to hone one's focus on each and every
approach. Even though increasingly tired as the day
progressed it was surprising at how little the quality
of the landings deteriorated. I put this down to the
currency and recency aspects but more so to the
heightened awareness of wind conditions and
preparedness for any cross wind influence. in other
words, the taildragger extracted a high level of
performance from a very average pilot.
I dont know about licencing in the US but in Oz,
sperate licences are required for the two
configurations. Having experienced that challenge,
nose draggers tend to land more automatically and just
dont provide as much satisfaction. Actually achieving
a comfort level in tail draggers by getting enough
consolidated experience under your belt is the greater
challenge. Once there though, its great fun.
On nother matters, Brian was kind enough to email me
the flight manual (June 06) for the Lightening that
Buz developed. Conratulations on such a highly
readable, informative and logically set out piece of
writing.
Also, now that there are quite a few Lightnings
airborne, would operators mind posting some achieved
data on cruise economy and performance?
Laurie
Sydney
--- N1BZRich@aol.com wrote:
> Doug wrote - "Somehow looks, lighter weight,
> slightly better performance can
> seem less important when you have lost control of
> your bird and are awaiting
> an impact with a non-runway environment."
>
> Ops, sounds like you might be one of those "half
> empty glass" guys (verses
> half full) that has already decided he is going to
> ground loop eventually.
> Kind of like those that say if you haven't landed
> gear up, you eventually will.
> I am more of a positive thinker and believe that
> "PPPPPP" - prior planning
> prevents piss poor performance. At any rate,
> differences of opinions is what
> makes horse races - and my horse is faster than
> yours. :-)
> Blue Skies,
> Buz
>
> PS: No, I don't really have a horse, but I do have
> 400 of them under the
> hood. Did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last
> night.
>
>
>
> http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
>
Laurie
02 46531233
0425 703226
Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit
the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_________________________________________________________________
See what youre getting intobefore you go there
http://newlivehotmail.com/?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_viral_preview_0507
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Taildraggers forever....... |
Guys
I am sure you all have seen these photos of Esqual tails, if not, enjoy
Dave Mcc
----- Original Message -----
From: nick otterback
To: lightning-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 9:36 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Taildraggers forever.......
To the group.....
This is nick. i have been touring Oregon since saturday and it is
great, spent some of sunday in pendelton, my dad used to be a air
traffic controller there, the place is apparently a aerobatic aircraft
hot bed. In the main hanger, and all based there, were: 2 eagles, 1
extra 300, decathalon, 2 sukhois, a giles 202, i think it was an edge540
or a extra 200, couldnt tell it was in the back, any way they were out
with the eagle and giles when we arrived, somehow thought this relavent
to our tail wheel discussion. Hiked Mt ST helens today, no words to
describe that!!!
Nick
N1BZRich@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 8/13/2007 8:40:43 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
Kayberg@aol.com writes:
Could it be they cost more to insure because people wreck em more?
If you travel a lot, then having to work at making that last
landing of a long cross country day can be a bit dangerous if you have a
taildragger. If you are a sport pilot, particularly if you are working
your way up the ratings game, then it makes more sense.
Doug,
Well written, well thought out, and I agree with most of what you
said - the rest of it is pure BS. :-) Just kidding of course. First,
yes, insurance on T/W aircraft is more because people do wreck them
more. Why, probably many reasons, including yours that says they are
harder to land. But I suspect a bigger reason is people just don't fly
enough to stay proficient and thus don't have the "golden hands" and the
best judgement. I am very proud of the fact that I flew my Pitts for 29
years with no accidents or incidents. But, it is a very honest airplane
and I flew it a lot. Proficiency and currency is important in what ever
you fly, but nose wheel airplanes are definitely more forgiving.
Second, your comment about tail wheels being more "dangerous" after a
long day of flying - no, I can buy that. The key word I don't buy is
"dangerous". Again, if you are current and proficient, they are no more
dangerous than any other kind of landing gear. Remember, part of being
a good pilot is judgement. If you are too tired after a long day -
don't make that last flight. You should always make your personal
physical condition part of your "go-no go" decision. Also, a tailwheel
pilot
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Taildraggers forever....... |
Hey Dave,
Thanks for sharing those photos. I had forgotten that I had them
somewhere in my files. As I recall the Esqual designer was developing this tail
dragger model for possible future kit production. Makes a good looking
airplane with the gear up. My thoughts (which agree with Nick) for the tail wheel
Lightning would be to make it fixed gear to keep it simple and save weight.
With the proper gear leg fairings and wheel pants, the speed lost verses a
retract configuration would be very small.
Blue Skies,
Buz
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Input on Lightning Tailwheel Aircraft |
Nick,
Lots of talk about a tailwheel version of the Lightning. Not in any rush,
but just wanted to add my input. Seems like it might be possible to put the
gear in a position that would be ahead of the wings, much like the Harmon
Rocket. I haven't run the numbers, but I think that'd keep the CG about the
right distance from the mains. It also looks hella good. Depending on how
far forward you got them builders might have the option of a different
engine choice. (read slightly more powerful engine) Of course you'd
probably have to minimize the distance of the firewall mount to the engine
as well for in flight CG stuff. You've probably already thought of this,
but just wanted to throw that out there. Brian W.
_________________________________________________________________
Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and more.then map the best route!
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&ss=yp.bars~yp.pizza~yp.movie%20theater&cp=42.358996~-71.056691&style=r&lvl=13&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene-0607&encType=1&FORM=MGAC01
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lightning Operating Manual |
i do not forget ...i think????...we just sent the current build manual out before
EAA as requested, if you need a flight manual we can send that too, remember
as the builder manufacturer you are responsible for writing a manual that
pertains to your aircraft and the perfromance and spec's for it. We have the one
that buz wrote and is very good, this a general POH and should be modified
for each aircraft when good data is collected.....
Nick
Tex Mantell <wb2ssj@earthlink.net> wrote:
Thanks for the offer on the manual, Nick has promised to send me the new one
some day. He is a busy guy and forgets now and then. Tex
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Whittingham"
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 10:49 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning Operating Manual
>
>
> Tex,
> I'm waiting for a 4 seat version of the Lightning before I decide to
> build. Actually owing for my million dollar education (slightly
> exagerated of course) is preventing me from doing so. I do have somewhere
> between 60-75 hours in the Lightning though and love it.
>
> I have a 3-view of the Lightning in the Flight manual document. This was
> the original draft of the manual, courtesy of Buz Rich, but I added the
> line drawings. Had a more current version of the line drawings with
> exhaust stacks added in the profile view and the width of the elevator
> added in the overhead, but can't find that document. This document has
> probably been updated several times with Arion, but I figured that some of
> you might could use it or might like to see it. Buz followed the standard
> format for operating manuals, but I think that you'll agree that he did a
> superb job. A lot of the warnings and cautions writings comes from his
> years of experience and experience in aircraft and with the Jabiru engine
> and in flying his Esqual with Lightning Stuff on it. If any of you need a
> copy, just send me your regular email address. It's about 2 Megabites
> file and won't attach to Matronics. Brian W.
>
> From: "Tex Mantell"
> To:
> Subject: Re: Lightning-List: line drawing
> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:16:31 -0400
>
>
> Thanks Brian, and I have enjoyed your comments over the last year. When
> are you going to build a Lightning?
>
> Tex
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Whittingham"
>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 9:48 PM
> Subject: RE: Lightning-List: line drawing
>
>
>>
>>
>>Tex,
>> Just go to the main website, under specifications tab, scroll down, 3
>> view drawing.
>>http://www.arionaircraft.com/Specifications.html Brian W.
>>
>>From: "Tex Mantell"
>>To: "lightning List"
>>Subject: Lightning-List: line drawing
>>Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:40:58 -0400
>>
>>Someone posted a web site that had a line drawing of the Lightning. Could
>>someone pass that along to me? Tex
>>
>>Thank You
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Puzzles, trivia teasers, word scrambles and more. Play for your chance to
>>win! http://club.live.com/home.aspx?icid=CLUB_hotmailtextlink
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Messenger Caf open for fun 24/7. Hot games, cool activities served
> daily. Visit now. http://cafemessenger.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_AugHMtagline
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Lightning Tailwheel Pic |
Just doodling with the line drawing. What a TW Lightning might look like.
I also drew out a wing that is much more representative of the Lightning
airfoil. If you've never seen my pic looking down the Lightning wing
directly from the side you've missed out. It is a dual concave trailing
edge, kind of a teardrop. Really a pretty form. See what you think?
Demand for a TW? Maybe Nick will invite me back to SYI to fly one if and
when they decide to build it? Brian W.
_________________________________________________________________
Puzzles, trivia teasers, word scrambles and more. Play for your chance to
win! http://club.live.com/home.aspx?icid=CLUB_hotmailtextlink
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Taildraggers forever....... |
Hi All,
Three reasons I have not seriously considered buying or building a
conventional gear aircraft and they all relate to money:
1. I have no experience in them and would have to pay an instructor to
get it.
2. Insurance costs will be higher initially and I will never be able to
recoup that expense.
3. Some day I will need to sell my aircraft and the pool of potential
buyers is far larger for tri gear aircraft than conventional gear aircraft.
If the new buyer does not have conventional gear experience he will be
faced with the same three considerations and that buyer will most likely
decide to purchase a tri gear aircraft. This analysis may not be
relevant to everyone but, it make great financial sense to me.........Bill.
Laurie Hoffman wrote:
>
>Hi All,
>There have been excellent overviews of tail dragger vs
>'nose dragger' posted by buz, nick and others which
>really summarise everything important about the
>comparison. Horses for courses really as has been so
>well outlined. Thats the great thing about
>flying...you can select from such a huge range of
>types, performance, configuration and operating and
>construction costs.
>
>In one post there was reference to the increased risk
>posed by taildraggers at the end of a long day due
>fatigue. Reading the comments about how tail draggers
>require the pilot to think more, work a little harder
>and remain at a higher level of conditions awareness
>near the ground, brought back memories of some
>thousands of tows in Super Cub, Pawnee and Calair
>glider tugs. As most often the only rostered pilot for
>the day it was not uncommon for that to entail 20-30
>flights and on rarer occasions 30-40.
>
>This tended to hone one's focus on each and every
>approach. Even though increasingly tired as the day
>progressed it was surprising at how little the quality
>of the landings deteriorated. I put this down to the
>currency and recency aspects but more so to the
>heightened awareness of wind conditions and
>preparedness for any cross wind influence. in other
>words, the taildragger extracted a high level of
>performance from a very average pilot.
>
>I dont know about licencing in the US but in Oz,
>sperate licences are required for the two
>configurations. Having experienced that challenge,
>nose draggers tend to land more automatically and just
>dont provide as much satisfaction. Actually achieving
>a comfort level in tail draggers by getting enough
>consolidated experience under your belt is the greater
>challenge. Once there though, its great fun.
>
>On nother matters, Brian was kind enough to email me
>the flight manual (June 06) for the Lightening that
>Buz developed. Conratulations on such a highly
>readable, informative and logically set out piece of
>writing.
>
>Also, now that there are quite a few Lightnings
>airborne, would operators mind posting some achieved
>data on cruise economy and performance?
>
>Laurie
>Sydney
>
>--- N1BZRich@aol.com wrote:
>
>
>
>>Doug wrote - "Somehow looks, lighter weight,
>>slightly better performance can
>>seem less important when you have lost control of
>>your bird and are awaiting
>>an impact with a non-runway environment."
>>
>>Ops, sounds like you might be one of those "half
>>empty glass" guys (verses
>>half full) that has already decided he is going to
>>ground loop eventually.
>>Kind of like those that say if you haven't landed
>>gear up, you eventually will.
>>I am more of a positive thinker and believe that
>>"PPPPPP" - prior planning
>>prevents piss poor performance. At any rate,
>>differences of opinions is what
>>makes horse races - and my horse is faster than
>>yours. :-)
>>Blue Skies,
>>Buz
>>
>>PS: No, I don't really have a horse, but I do have
>>400 of them under the
>>hood. Did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last
>>night.
>>
>>
>>
>>http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>Laurie
> 02 46531233
> 0425 703226
>
>
>Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the
Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
>http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|