• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Alaska Wheeler Landings question

kiwicubber

PATRON
Te Kowhai, New Zealand
I don’t want to start another ancient wheeler versus 3 pointer argument, but I have had a couple of colleagues return to New Zealand from some flying in Alaska, and they told me that most (all) commercial operators there ban landing on 3 points.
(a) Is this true?
(b) Why?
 
No ban on 3 point landings. Wheel landings preferred in off airport ops for better obstacle avoidance and less wear and tear on tail/Tailwheel.
 
I don't know of any ban on 3 point landings. You just have more control and the reasons jrb mentioned with a 3 point landing. Planes do differ but in general it is a lot easier to control a tailwheel aircraft at 50 mph with the tail up. You can always try a high speed taxi down the length of the runway at 50 mph with tail up and at 3 point and see what feels better.
DENNY
 
Most Alaskan tail draggers sit on big tires. It wouldn't make much sense to 3-point a Cub on 35s. The same is true with a Skywagon on 29s. If you compared my tail low landing attitude in my Cessna to the 3-point in the same model using stock tires the attitude will be very similar. In my Cub with extended gear and 35s? The difference would be more dramatic.
 
The big debate on 3 pt vs. wheel is lost on me. There are fast landings and slow landings. Fast ones will be wheel landings. Slow may be either and can transition back and forth.

One can come in slow enough to touch tail first, but lower the nose to land on the mains before the tail touches. One can land tail first (or 3 pt) and then lift the tail for better visibility or braking. Once slow enough, one can lower the tail to any level to allow for more braking while not nosing over.

...and for most aircraft (those without large tires and/or extended gear) a 3 point landing is not a "full stall" landing.
 
The big debate on 3 pt vs. wheel is lost on me. There are fast landings and slow landings. Fast ones will be wheel landings. Slow may be either and can transition back and forth.

One can come in slow enough to touch tail first, but lower the nose to land on the mains before the tail touches. One can land tail first (or 3 pt) and then lift the tail for better visibility or braking. Once slow enough, one can lower the tail to any level to allow for more braking while not nosing over.

...and for most aircraft (those without large tires and/or extended gear) a 3 point landing is not a "full stall" landing.

Unless you are the one paying for the insurance on the rookie dragger. In that case they should commit to either a tail or wheel landing a week before said landing and should not change their mind before coming to a complete stop, or there will likely be damage. :)
 
Quite a few types are happy with a tail low wheel landing. Touchdown speed should not be faster than in a three point, unless the approach was dragging in on power behind the drag curve and you are dropping the aircraft in - not quite smooth technique.

At the point of touchdown no real angst whether letting tail down, or relaxing and rolling out on wheels.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org
 
A fewYears back I was flying with a ATP heavy pilot in the backseat. I mentioned to him that I would gladly take any advice he could give me to help improve my landing. He remarked that I should commit to either a three point or wheel landing before I landed. I told him I usually commit to a wheel landing but just screw it up that’s why it looked like I did not commit. ��
DENNY
 
Last edited:
Before Attlee came out with SC mod to move the flap handle left toward the fuselage a beach landing (sloped) with an off shore wind one had to lift your left leg off the left rudder to have full flaps and full left alerón. First time was disconcerting, second time ok, third time piece of cake. I installed the flap mod on rebuild.


Sent from my iPad using SuperCub.Org
 
Back
Top