kj7sr(at)earthlink.net
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 12:16 pm Post subject: re Taildraggers |
 |
|
I am at a bit of a loss to understand the hesitancy of people to fly "taildraggers". I learned to fly age 18 in a 75 hp Aeronca Champ. There was no tri-cycle gear and so no intimidation about tail wheels. That is just what you learned to fly. Several years later the Cessna came out with the tricycle gear. We referred to the taildragger as "conventional" gear vis a vis the tricycle. My instructor was very careful to tell me at the 172 checkout that one had to be very careful as if the a tail wind caught the 172 right it would tip it on the nose. I was quite leery of the tricycle for some time. It is all in what you are used to and I still don't think the taildragger is any harder to land or much more susceptable to landing problems than the tricycle. You just do it a little, and I emphasize the little, differently from a tri. If you are going to land on anything but pavement, go with the "conventional". It simply works better and does not really pose any more challe nges than a tricycle. I couple of hours in the pattern and you will be wondering what the fuss was all about.
Chuck
Charles Bloom
kj7sr(at)earthlink.net (kj7sr(at)earthlink.net)
Why Wait? Move to EarthLink.
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
