Flying Taildraggers

I recently installed Golden Wings, where most of the aircraft are taildraggers. I wasn't particularly fond of the available selection of aircraft, so I downloaded Milton Shupe's Spartan Executive (spartan.zip). Since I have zero taildragger time, my landings were not up to my usual standards. I read the Learning Center section on "Flying Taildraggers", but it hasn't helped much. After dozens of landings, I've managed to have exactly one which didn't bounce.

I suspect that the tendency to "bounce" is perhaps a little bit exaggerated in FS9. I'd be curious to know if any pilots out there with taildragger time have any thoughts on that.

Elmer J. Fudd

Bouncing is caused by steering your plane onto the runway at a too high speed, in fact while it's wings are still creating (too much) lift.

I would want to suggest that you begin by trying to level off just a few feet above the runway, cutting the throttle to idle and then letting your plane settle down by itself, while constantly keeping the nose up as high as possible during the whole touch down process. You in fact need to stall your plane with it's tires just above the runway surface and if you do this correctly, you can even make a perfect so called "three point landing".

Good luck.

Hans

Thanks, Hans.

Quite so. And even though I knew that from reading the "Flying Taildraggers" treatise, I still had trouble.

Actually, with the Spartan, I found the "wheel landings" easier. When I did the three point landings, I had a small window in the bottom right corner with a view from the spot plane, to see what was going on. No matter how gently I touched down, it would bounce, even if only a few inches.

I've been doing some more experimenting, and it turned out that I had complicated the issue by using the wrong computer, wrong settings, wrong stick, and wrong plane. I've adjusted the settings, stick, and plane to the Piper Cub, which is what I ought to have started with in the first place. It's not as "bouncy" as the Spartan Executive. The Spartan is particularly bouncy. I'm getting much practice.

It's like they say, when asked, "How do you get to Carnegie Hall?" Answer: "Practice, man. Practice, practice, practice".

Regards,

Elmer, J. Fudd

Elmer - Successful wheel landings are a feat for even the most seasoned taildragger pilots! When I first started flying taildraggers, it was in a Cessna 170B model, and yes the bounce was there waiting for me to see if I could conquer. One thing suggested to me, when first starting, try landing nose high, allowing the tail wheel to lightly touch first and a nice 3 point landing should follow. After many hours of flying the taildragger, you are no longer landing tail wheel first, but making consistent well made 3 point landings!

My Grandfather and dad owned a Cessna 180 and I don't recall them ever making a wheel landing with that airplane. Always a 3 pointer! If they were alive today and were asked to do a wheel landing, I doubt they could do it without a struggle to make it look presentable!

Stick with it, wheel landings take practice. Some of my nicest wheel landings in flight sim have been made with the DC3 (very large) and the Piper Cub (very small)! Everything in between will be a challenge for you, it just takes patience, but you CAN conquer! Just remember as Hans suggested, level out just above the runway, and the rest all comes down to good power management and timing!

Don't rush the landing, just help the plane do what you intend it to do!

Good luck and Happy Flying!

Rick :cool:

Don't forget though that some tail dragger aircraft were prone to ground loop if three pointed, the DH Mosquito was one. Seems that the design position of the tailplane & of the fin & rudder had an effect & so it was normal to do a mainwheel touchdown. Looking at the video of a French made 7/8 scale Mosquito which came to grief a couple of years ago was because the pilot did a 3 pointer. Bounce effect could be result of too stiff a setting in the contacts data in the aircraft.cfg?

Keith

Keith,

I've compared the settings in the aircraft.cfg file of the Spartan to the one in the Cub. Nothing obvious jumped out at me.

Regards,

Elmer J. Fudd

Rick,

Thanks for that. Yes, I've heard the 180 is a beast.

Regards,

Elmer

Bounce fixed!!! Found that I could not 3 point her because of insufficient elevator authority at the stall, so she would touchdown on the main wheels & tend to try & nose over causing her to bounce. So for a first try I modified table 517 Cm_de(q) Elevator Deflection (moment) Factor vs q at X=9.460485, y=.7207, to y=1. This now gives plenty of elevator authority at the stall, so could easily be adjusted to tune it so that one does run out of elevator at the stall, try .85?

I can now get a 3 pointer with ease.

If one compares the Spartan with the J3 Cub, the cub has plenty of elevator at the stall so is easy to 3 point.

Keith

P.S. Just tried 0.85 & that is just right, elevator has just enough authority at the stall to need full up elevator.

K

I was beginning so suspect something of the sort. It all seemed to happen so fast, that it was hard to tell exactly what happened. I would start to flare, and the nose would come up, but the descent would continue. The bottom would just drop out, and it would prang into the runway.

I read somewhere that the Spartan is "realistic". If this is how the real plane flew, it's small wonder that they only ever managed to sell 36 of these things.

My AirEd doesn't give me the opportunity to modify 517. You must be using something more sophisticated. Any chance you could e-mail me your corrected .air file? I'd appreciate it. I'm at my wits' end with this beast, in its current incarnation.

Regards,

Elmer J. Fudd

Was replying but have lost it - so starting again.

Sent you a PM with my e-mail, I can then send it to you when replying. Not sure how to attach it here. I wonder - have gone advanced, can attach I think.- no luck says invalid file. Revert to sending me. In the meantime I also have Jerry Beckwiths AirUpdate v 1.0.0.1 which I think does just that to the original AirEd v 1.0.5.2. Another useful one is by Herve Sors Aircraft Airfile Manager V2.2. This shows some tabular entries as a graph.

Regards

Keith

P.S. The cub does not have table 517 & its elevator effectivity is set to 1 throughout its range, so the cub shows up as not realistic I would say in the sim.

K

Actually, per your advice, rather than modifying the .air file, I modified the .cfg file. I set the "elevator_effectiveness" to 2, which has helped. Another thing that has helped: I hadn't been using the "takeoff window", thinking that it's a bit like cheating, but I just couldn't see a darn thing in the 3D view with the nose up so high. Between the .cfg mod and the use of the takeoff window, it has gotten much easier.

Regards,

Elmer J. Fdd

Rick,

 

Thanks for that. Yes, I've heard the 180 is a beast.

 

Regards,

 

Elmer

Elmer - Naw, once you have had a couple of times around the dance floor, she tames down. One instructor told me, flying a 180 is like dancing to faster music, you just got to move your feet a little more and faster! One thing that gets most newcomers with the 180, you don't really need to be putting that power to the panel like you would with a 172! Just give her a little to drink and she'll treat you with a little more respect. Once you get really good with the 180 and you are flying in and out of short fields, you will then be able to be more demanding of the power she has to offer!

It's definitely flying at a whole new level!

Rick :cool:

Elmer and Keith - Welcome to the world of flying! I think learning to fly was where I lost most of my hair! I can remember introduction to X-wind takeoffs and landings and I would get totally exhausted and frustrated and I would come home and share my lessons with Dad, and he would just smirk and say, "hang in there, you'll get it!" And I did! It came to me as if someone just handed me what I was missing, figuring I had enough! This flight simming is a wonderful thing, wish I had a computer and flight sim back when I first started flying lessons! Listening to you two, I can tell you are learning from your experimenting with different flight sim setting and configurations, and at the same time, you are learning the basics of flight and sharing with each other! I admire both of you for taking on the tail draggers. It's hard to believe moving that small wheel to the rear of the aircraft, can make flying a total different ball game. Like my Dad used to tell me, "Hang in there, you'll get it!" When you get really good, you have the more complex taildraggers, like the Corsairs and the P51 Mustangs, to look forward to flying! I don't know about you two, but I could never afford to fly what is being offered here on the flight sim! Enjoy, there's a lot more adventures awaiting you!

Rick :cool:

If you guys are interested, here's a nice little Cessna 170B model taildragger that's very docile. Little more airplane than the cub, but a whole lot tamer than the Spartan!

S2004 (ACOF) - FS2004 General Aviation

FS2004 Cessna 170B

[ Download | View ]

Name: alphc170.zip

Size: 3,430,762 Date: 03-16-2009 Downloads: 3,774

FS2004 Cessna 170B v1.1 A freeware model by Alphasim. Includes one model and one texture set. Complete cockpit with 2D panel/updated gauges and VC.

Enjoy! - Rick :cool:

Hi Elmer, you have no doubt by now found a way or another aircraft to nail those taildragger landings. I have flown a Tiger Moth in real life, so that is my only frame of reference, but we mostly did "wheelers" - touching down on front wheels, pushing the stick forward to keep the tail up for as long as possible and allowing speed to bleed off so that the tail would settle down on its own. It sounds completely counter-intuitive to push the stick forward on landing, but it worked very well on the Tiger Moth as speed bled off fast once the wheels are on the ground and that tail came down quickly.

As long as the tail is in the air, you have control over it with the rudder. As soon as the tail is on the ground, especially with too much speed, there is the risk of a ground loop. I never came close to a ground loop with the wheeler method. A three-pointer is very hard to do and we tried to minimise it in real life as it has a higher risk of damaging the aircraft if not done properly, through bouncing, wings tipping or a ground loop. I tried it once or twice and pulled it off, but came very close to ground looping, so stuck to wheelers.

Now, having said all that, I have not found a plane in FS9, FSX, or X-Plane that can emulate what I experienced in real life, as they either careen too much on the runway when I try a wheeler, or the nose tips forward when the joystick is pushed forward and they don't bleed speed as fast as in real life with the tail in the air. The only flight-sim plane that I can do a realistic wheeler in is the freeware Tiger Moth by Ant's.

I found that in FSX and especially X-Plane the best method to land a taildragger is a kind of "hybrid-three pointer" - float the aircraft (throttle all the way back and gently pull the nose up without gaining altitude) until it is near stall and as soon as it touches the ground, pull back hard on the joystick, in other words plant that tail into the ground, using "airflow" over the elevators to keep it straight. I can't recall what works best on the Milton Shupe Spartan Executive though.

My Grandfather and dad owned a Cessna 180 and I don't recall them ever making a wheel landing with that airplane. Always a 3 pointer!

I used to tow gliders with a 1953 Cessna 180 -- nice bird. We mostly did wheel landings with that airplane, partly to get the main gear on the ground early (in the dirt part of the runway) to reduce tire wear, but also to make it more gentle on the tailwheel. She had the Cleveland brakes, which were powerful enough to actually hold the tail in the air until almost stopped, then allowed me to ease the tail to the ground (after MUCH practice) but it's not something I did much of.

What I found was that in the air it flew much like the early 182s (no surprise), but on landing a competent tailwheel pilot wouldn't have a lot of trouble (wheel or three point) provided they kept it mostly straight, which was fairly easy if you kept on top of it. However if you let it get slightly sideways, it would be a bear to recover because of all the mass behind the main gear unlike, say, a Cub, which let me allow a student a LOT of sloppy rudder work before I had to get on the rudders.

Also, that spring steel gear made wheel landings a bit touchier than in many other types.

All the above said, it wasn't something to start a tailwheel transition in -- leave that to a Cub or Citabria.

+1 Well put Larry! I'm all for venturing out with new and different aircraft, but, Keith and Elmer are practicing their landing techniques with both the Cub and the Spartan. Cub is great, but the Spartan might be too much starting out. That is why I forwarded the download info for the 170B which might be a good go between. One other aircraft which is available and comes to mind, is the DeHavilland Chipmunk!! I still occasionally load that up and fly it around for fun. Very docile and easy to make nice wheel landings!

Have a nice day and be safe out there!

Rick :cool:

Rick,

The reason I chose the Spartan, was because I'm using it in Golden Wings, and I wanted to keep it "time period correct". I hadn't realized that it would be such a handful. As Keith suggested, the bird seems to have a problem with elevator authority at stall, which when corrected makes quite a difference. Also, the use of the "takeoff window", (which I had wanted to avoid using) makes a huge difference. In 3D view, it's hard to judge flare height, when you can't see.

From what I recall, the problem seemed to be that if I had enough speed to keep the bottom from falling out, there was too much speed. Even when I greased it on, it would bounce (even if only half a foot). With less speed, it would pay off suddenly, like the old laminar flow wing Cherokees.

I'll get there, eventually...

I do have a Cessna 180 in my inventory, but it came along after the "Golden Age".

Regards,

Elmer J. Fudd

Good luck Elmer! You'll work it out, I am sure! Nice to see you and Keith working on it together!

Oh, almost forgot to ask, are you using a joystick? I use a CH Products Mach III joystick. the stick is only about 2.5 - 3" high which makes it very light on the control response, which I like. I tried the larger joysticks years ago, and I have planted my likes to the smaller joystick. Nice for the computer and the desk that my wife and I share, least I know she won't be tripping over it and unleashing her "wrath" upon me! LOL!

Have a nice day! Rick :cool:

Rick,

Yes, Keith's suggestion about the elevator effectiveness was quite helpful. I'm getting there, even without the "cheat" window. In 3D view, I'm still having a little trouble judging my flare height, but I'll get there.

Once I realized what I was in for, I did spend 5.8 hours in the Cub.

Yes, I are using a joystick. I use the Logitech Extreme 3D Pro for my airplanes, and the Logitech Wingman Force 3D for my helicopters, with the "Force" turned off.

We don't share, we have separate offices. I use a U-shaped desk, to accommodate the three machines, and the three sticks. One of them is for F/S 8, another for F/S 9, and the third for adjusting/testing/surfing the net while on long flights.

Sucks, to be rich. ;)

I'm on my way to Vegas (in Golden Wings), where it's quite a bit warmer than here. When I get there, I'll turn up the heat.

You have a nice day, too.

Regards,

Elmer J. Fudd

I was brought up on taildraggers, my father owned a Percival Proctor which he bought in 1949 for about £400, (I would have been 11 years old). He was a licenced ground engineer, so he was able to keep it for 18 years at a small cost, being able to use it for business travel occasionally. When I was apprenticed at Vickers Armstrongs I was lucky enough to be subsidised to learn to fly, paying only 10% of the real value per hour. The course was for 30 hours flying to achieve ones PPL & it had to be completed in 6 months, so off to Fairoaks & start in a Tiger Moth of course. Nothing new really I had flown with my Dad in 1946 in one when civil flying restarted after WW2. I had no chance of equalling my Dads record of going solo in 1 hour 30 mins, but after 5 hours 30 I went for the test, unfortunately the weather was too gusty so had to be delayed, but my log book says 6 hours 30. I converted to fly an Auster Alpha & then the Taylorcraft plus D that was in the fleet. I was worried about the Auster because in the Tiger one is Right Handed on the joystick but Left handed in the Auster & Taylorcraft, but really it was easy. Always taught to 3 point & the only wheeler I remember doing was in a landing competition where I forced the wheels onto the touchdown line - well almost! Unfortunately, as one does, girls marriage, house buying & kids put paid to flying, but I did most of my working life in aircraft design & development, & now enjoy making & flying FS 9/FSX models - available here. The main difference is one has lost the 3D & easy scan capability in real life, which makes quite a difference when landing, as well as the loss of sensation of air turbulence on oneself & the necessity of correcting the aircraft after being upset by turbulence. Maybe the commercial simulators reduce those problems.

Keith

Man, you're ahead of me by almost a generation. I started in 1972. There were a few tailwheels around, but not many. I remember seeing a sign on the highway that said, "Learn to fly, in a Champion". The sign said that one could be bought for $7,995, but when I went in to make inquiries, I was told, "That sign is old. They're about $14,000 now..."

Time for a new sign. I got hooked anyway. You done good. I soloed at about 11 hours, I think, but got PPL in 35, which was not common, at that time. I was told at one airport it would be 45-50, so I went to a different one.

Regards,

Elmer J. Fudd

In 3D view, I'm still having a little trouble judging my flare height, but I'll get there.

In real life that's often caused by looking too close to the aircraft at the flare, or in many "conventional gear" aircraft it's from looking over the nose instead of out the side a bit where you can see the horizon. Paying attention to peripheral vision for runway alignment is important, as well, though that's more difficult in the sim.

Don't know if it will help you or not, but almost all my flying is done with tail draggers. Specifically the DC-3. I found that by leaving a bit of power on and maintaining a slightly lower glide slope, that my bouncing is fairly well negated. Using the DC-3 as my example; Final is at 100. Enough power is maintained to keep that speed. Flare begins just over the threshhold of the runway. Speed bleeds off smoothly and at the moment of touchdown, throttles are pulled back, flaps are raised, heat is off while pushing forward on the yoke. I still occasionally bounce, but usually that's because I got in a hurry and flew it onto the runway. Most landings are pretty smooth.

Hope this helps some.

P.S. I solo'd at 18.1 hours back in 1990 in a 1969 Cessna 150 in Salina, Kansas' Kansas College of Technology. Still got the back of my shirt in a drawer.

Thanks for the tips. I was doing pretty-much the same thing, but found that I was leaving too much manifold pressure on, about 20 inches. The other problem was misjudging my flare height. For a four-seater, the Spartan is pretty high off the ground. Elevator authority at stall was also limited, until Keith helped with an adjustment.

Regards,

Elmer J. Fudd