Wheel Landing a 180

[stewartb]

Thanks for that reply. So you think a three point is the slowest landing? I'd say that you have excessive speed if your elevator can keep your nose up. If a guy is really on his game his touchdown happens at the moment the tail gives up, and in that scenario the tail doesn't stay down so 3 point isn't available. Actually, in Cubs anyway, the best pilots I know gauge their final approach speed by elevator effectiveness. If they can raise the nose they're going too fast.

The counterpoint to that is if you have aft CG, and then the tail drops out before the wing stalls, and then you're just along for the ride.

VGs and other lift accessories promote flatter attitudes at slower speeds. I'm a fan.

 

[DENNY]

If your supercub/180 wing is at "FULL STALL" (no lift) in the three point attitude why does everyone bother with tie down ropes Just saying.


To land slower with a wheel landing than a 3 point simply leave power on, ,flair with the tailwheel a foot or more below the main this will allow you to fly slower than a three point attitude. Now just before the tailwheel touches release stick/yoke or dump flaps and roll it on the mains. I have trouble with the simply part of this advice quite often.
DENNY

 

[Rob]

I land my cub purely by the tactile feel of the elevator. And on several other aircraft it is also my barometer for lift off. I am also a 'throttle jockey'.
So... pretty much loved that post... right up to the point of reading 'loaded so far aft the tail drops out before the wing stalls '
Just the thought of that hurts my brain. I guess that would be one way to 3-pt on big wheels.

I am also of the opinion (perhaps incorrectly) that in my cub, when I can no longer raise the nose, it is not because the tail has quit, but rather because the wing has. Probably very much the opposite on a cub with a heavily modded wing and stock tail.

 

[dgapilot]

Thanks for that reply. So you think a three point is the slowest landing? I'd say that you have excessive speed if your elevator can keep your nose up. If a guy is really on his game his touchdown happens at the moment the tail gives up, and in that scenario the tail doesn't stay down so 3 point isn't available. Actually, in Cubs anyway, the best pilots I know gauge their final approach speed by elevator effectiveness. If they can raise the nose they're going too fast.

The counterpoint to that is if you have aft CG, and then the tail drops out before the wing stalls, and then you're just along for the ride.

VGs and other lift accessories promote flatter attitudes at slower speeds. I'm a fan.

Critical aoa is the highest Cl for the airfoil section. That means that the slowest speed that will support the aircraft is with the wing at critical aoa. Any other aoa by definition requires a higher speed.

Tail effectiveness is a function of decolage, the difference in aoa between the forward lifting surface and the aft lifting surface. The tail, by design, for stability, will be at a lower aoa than the wing. If you are loosing elevator authority, you are either loaded too far aft, or the design has insufficient decolage. That is a stability and control issue, not a speed or lift issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dgapilot]

If your supercub/180 wing is at "FULL STALL" (no lift) in the three point attitude why does everyone bother with tie down ropes Just saying.


To land slower with a wheel landing than a 3 point simply leave power on, ,flair with the tailwheel a foot or more below the main this will allow you to fly slower than a three point attitude. Now just before the tailwheel touches release stick/yoke or dump flaps and roll it on the mains. I have trouble with the simply part of this advice quite often.
DENNY

Denny, your assumption of full stall being no lift is totally incorrect! The stall begins at critical angle of attack, which is where the wing produces the greatest amount of lift for any given airspeed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rob]

If you are loosing elevator authority, you are either loaded too far aft, or the design has insufficient decolage. That is a stability and control issue, not a speed or lift issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is what I was alluding to in my example of a modded wing and stock tail. And perhaps it doesn't take much mod at all, as it is pretty easy to make a cub fly with minimal elevator authority.

 

[King Brown]

I feel like the dumbest member here, maybe because no one told me the 180 was different from any other taildragger. On takeoff, a little pressure right rudder, let it fly off, no push on the yoke. Landing full-stall always, keep it straight, relax chocks in place. Daylight or lights, peripheral vision the same. A lot easier than my starter BC12D.

 

[stewartb]

This is what I was alluding to in my example of a modded wing and stock tail. And perhaps it doesn't take much mod at all, as it is pretty easy to make a cub fly with minimal elevator authority.

A 3 point landing is not a full stall. It's just an established attitude with a descent and the ground gets in the way. If it was a full stall the nose would drop. Whether that's a function of wing or tail doesn't matter in this context. Maybe I have the semantics wrong. I'm not a book smart pilot. I just drive airplanes.

And to throw a wrench in my own thoughts? I'm not a big fan of hanging on the prop at high AOA for landings, so there's that.

 

[bob turner]

Going technical, huh?

The C-180 and most Cubs are landed 3-point with the elevators at the UP-stop prior to touchdown. I think that is what is meant by full stall, in this context. The nose doesn’t drop (at least not noticeably).

Don’t try that in a Decathlon. You will drive the main mounts through the wing. We do wheel landings on all three wheels in the Dec. it is not a short field airplane, although a delightful variant of the Champ.

 

[DENNY]

Dgapilot
Sooo would my tail low wheel landing also be considered a full stall landing?
DENNY

 

[dgapilot]

Dgapilot
Sooo would my tail low wheel landing also be considered a full stall landing?
DENNY

Only if it results in the wing being at critical AOA. A tail low (like less than 6” when mains touch) was about the most consistent way to land the Howard, and get it down short. That was about the most unforgiving airplane when landing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[stewartb]

Just cuz it's a fun topic.

https://www.facebook.com/pilotscafe/videos/296497061177811?s=100001243020963&v=e&sfns=mo

 

[hotrod180]

I make a motion we discontinue the use of "full stall" in this thread, and stick to "3 point landing" and "wheel landing".

 

[Eddie Foy]

I think the horse is dead!

 

[sj]

I think the horse is dead!

Oh this horse will rise again if not here somewhere else!

 

[Eddie Foy]

Almost as good as the downwind turn!

Oh this horse will rise again if not here somewhere else!

 

[JimParker256]

I'm a low-time tailwheel pilot (7ECA), and was taught both wheel and 3-point landing techniques during my TW training. My CFI strongly prefers wheel landings (former RV-6 owner), but after the training, I found I was far more comfortable with 3-point landings. But now (roughly 50 TW hours later - much of it pattern work), I find myself gravitating more and more to tail-low wheel landings. Part of it is not liking the stress on the tailwheel in a true 3-point landing, and part of it is just getting more comfortable when the sight picture and knowing exactly where the wheels really are... As Contact suggested (probably in another thread), flying low passes down the runway without touching down helps get that "feel" for the plane.