Matronics Email Lists Forum Index Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
 
 Get Email Distribution Too!Get Email Distribution Too!    FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Tail dragger options vs tricycle gear, was: Re:Everyb

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kitfox-List
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
MichaelGibbs(at)cox.net
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:09 pm    Post subject: Tail dragger options vs tricycle gear, was: Re:Everyb Reply with quote

Lynn sez:

Quote:
...when I flew my Kitfox taildragger to New York to visit the Old
Rhinebeck Aerodrome...they asked me if it was a taildragger and I
told them yes it was, and they said come on in. They had an incident
with a nosegear plane and their insurance company said no more nose
gears, thank you.

I find that very hard to swallow (but I'll admit that the
taildraggers just seem "right" at a place like Old Rhinebeck).
That's like saying they had a problem with an airplane that had
upholstered seats so now you have to sit on a wood plank. Smile

Quote:
Besides, a nose gear plane landing at a field where conventional
gear WWI planes are flying?

There's nothing conventional about taildraggers. If "conventional"
refers to the origins of powered flight, the earliest aircraft had
skids or tricycle or even quad wheel arrangements for the first
several years. On the other hand, if the term refers to what is most
common, that would surely be tricycle gear airplanes in this day and
age. Maybe its just the conventional use of the term "conventional,"
which would, of course, be taildraggers. Smile

Mike G.
N728KF, Kitfox IV-1200 Speedster
Phoenix, AZ


- 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
Back to top
larry huntley



Joined: 19 Jul 2008
Posts: 149

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 3:03 pm    Post subject: Tail dragger options vs tricycle gear, was: Re:Everyb Reply with quote

Mike,
You ever been into Rhinebeck? It is basically a slightly modified pasture
with variations up and down probably 20'. Innteresting. I probably wouldn't
go in there with anything that lands over 40mph. Larry Huntley

---


- 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

_________________
Larry Huntley,Dundee,NY
Kitfox 4-1200 N234EE
EA81,AMAX Redrive Warp 3 blade
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
MichaelGibbs(at)cox.net
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 3:13 pm    Post subject: Tail dragger options vs tricycle gear, was: Re:Everyb Reply with quote

Yes, I have been there. I agree, a Kitfox is the biggest, heaviest
thing I'd take in there!

Mike G.
N728KF, Kitfox IV-1200, Speedster
Phoenix, AZ

On Dec 31, 2008, at 4:02 PM, "Larry Huntley" <asq(at)roadrunner.com> wrote:

[quote]
<asq(at)roadrunner.com>

Mike,
You ever been into Rhinebeck? It is basically a slightly modified
pasture with variations up and down probably 20'. Innteresting. I
probably wouldn't go in there with anything that lands over
40mph. Larry Huntley

---


- 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
Back to top
matronics(at)bob.brennan.
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:03 pm    Post subject: Tail dragger options vs tricycle gear, was: Re:Everyb Reply with quote

Here's a shot down the flightline at Old Rhinebeck a few months ago. The
Fokker Triplane is a replica but is fun to watch flying. They also have a
Wright Flyer and Bleriot from 1910, both also replicas but I've seen an
original 1910 Bleriot fly at the Shuttleworth Collection in the UK. Don't
get me wrong, I will drool equally over a new glass-cockpit LSA!

Do not archive
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox
Rotax 582 with 3 blade prop
Wrightsville Pa

--


- 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



IMG_2660.JPG
 Description:
 Filesize:  786.12 KB
 Viewed:  277 Time(s)

IMG_2660.JPG


Back to top
Lynn Matteson



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 2778
Location: Grass Lake, Michigan

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:47 pm    Post subject: Tail dragger options vs tricycle gear, was: Re:Everyb Reply with quote

I found the term "conventional" rather strange too, when I first
heard it applied to taildraggers. At first I thought the book "Taming
the taildragger" was referring to nose gear when they mentioned
"conventional gear", but I was wrong. For some reason this tag has
stuck, even though most gear nowadays is the nose gear.

Apparently Rhinebeck...according to the guy who walked the field with
me the day before I flew in there.....had a nose gear come in there
and being the field that it is, with a rock or two here and there,
and slightly undulating, and being grass, the plane bent, broke, or
otherwise hurt the nose wheel, and thus the rule.

So THAT'S the reason for the wooden planks, eh? : )

Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster, taildragger
Jabiru 2200, #2062, 596+ hrs
Sensenich 62x46
flying again after rebuild, and new Electroair direct-fire ignition
system;
also building a new pair of snow skis
do not archive

On Dec 31, 2008, at 5:08 PM, Michael Gibbs wrote:

Quote:

<MichaelGibbs(at)cox.net>

Lynn sez:

> ...when I flew my Kitfox taildragger to New York to visit the Old
> Rhinebeck Aerodrome...they asked me if it was a taildragger and I
> told them yes it was, and they said come on in. They had an
> incident with a nosegear plane and their insurance company said no
> more nose gears, thank you.

I find that very hard to swallow (but I'll admit that the
taildraggers just seem "right" at a place like Old Rhinebeck).
That's like saying they had a problem with an airplane that had
upholstered seats so now you have to sit on a wood plank. Smile

> Besides, a nose gear plane landing at a field where conventional
> gear WWI planes are flying?

There's nothing conventional about taildraggers. If "conventional"
refers to the origins of powered flight, the earliest aircraft had
skids or tricycle or even quad wheel arrangements for the first
several years. On the other hand, if the term refers to what is
most common, that would surely be tricycle gear airplanes in this
day and age. Maybe its just the conventional use of the term
"conventional," which would, of course, be taildraggers. Smile

Mike G.
N728KF, Kitfox IV-1200 Speedster
Phoenix, AZ




- 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

_________________
Lynn
Kitfox IV-Jabiru 2200
N369LM
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Lynn Matteson



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 2778
Location: Grass Lake, Michigan

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:07 pm    Post subject: Tail dragger options vs tricycle gear, was: Re:Everyb Reply with quote

Not to be outdone by Old Man Brennan (kidding, Bob), here's a couple
of early morning shots at Rhinebeck


Lynn
do not archive


- 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



100_3783.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  417.81 KB
 Viewed:  253 Time(s)

100_3783.jpg



100_3779.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  437.07 KB
 Viewed:  260 Time(s)

100_3779.jpg



_________________
Lynn
Kitfox IV-Jabiru 2200
N369LM
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
matronics(at)bob.brennan.
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:43 pm    Post subject: Tail dragger options vs tricycle gear, was: Re:Everyb Reply with quote

Funny how similar your paint scheme is to this Old Rhinebeck favorite, all
you need now to do is add a few more wings. And not mind being called an
"old fokker".

Oh no, I'm giving him more ideas!

Do not archive
Old man bob Wink

--


- 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



IMG_2658.JPG
 Description:
 Filesize:  487.81 KB
 Viewed:  234 Time(s)

IMG_2658.JPG


Back to top
Lynn Matteson



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 2778
Location: Grass Lake, Michigan

PostPosted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:24 am    Post subject: Tail dragger options vs tricycle gear, was: Re:Everyb Reply with quote

Better to be called an old Fokker than a dead Fokker. : )

Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster, taildragger
Jabiru 2200, #2062, 596+ hrs
Sensenich 62x46
flying again after rebuild, and new Electroair direct-fire ignition
system;
also building a new pair of snow skis
do not archive

On Dec 31, 2008, at 10:42 PM, Bob Brennan wrote:

Quote:
Funny how similar your paint scheme is to this Old Rhinebeck
favorite, all
you need now to do is add a few more wings. And not mind being
called an
"old fokker".

Oh no, I'm giving him more ideas!

Do not archive
Old man bob Wink



- 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

_________________
Lynn
Kitfox IV-Jabiru 2200
N369LM
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
propellerdesign(at)tele2.
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:03 am    Post subject: Tail dragger options vs tricycle gear, was: Re:Everyb Reply with quote

The first Fokker was the "SPIN" Dutch for spider, this was the first, The
mother Fokker.

see Mikael fly his new DR1 with original engine,

http://www.aerodrome.nu/
---


- 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
Back to top
Float Flyr



Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 2704
Location: Campbellton, Newfoundland

PostPosted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:22 pm    Post subject: Tail dragger options vs tricycle gear, was: Re:Everyb Reply with quote

I think the term conventional came from WW1 when most plane on both sides
had tailwheels... The reasons were there were few if any truly level
landing fields (areodromes).

My father mentioned to me that a nose wheel will tend to dig in if it hits
even a small hole while as tail wheel will pull itself out of the same hole.
That's why all the great bush planes of the past, Baevers, Otters and
Norsemen were all conventional gear. They also were easier to fit with
skis. If there was a perceived weak point it was the conventional gear
planes were often reinforced around the instrument panel to be fitted to
floats. Even my 'Fox has a reinforcing Y under the plane to strengthen it
on floats.

Older planes were at best slow planes. Having a nice small wheel in the
back twenty feet from the prop made a lot more sense than having a honking
great wheel and support blocking the wash from a few inches behind the prop.

I think, but am not sure, that the first major use of tricycle gear planes
was for bombers. Engines were either pusher or out on the wings so the drag
wasn't as great a factor. And in later years retractable gear became the
norm so drag was no longer an issue. My best guess would be the tricycle
configuration was originally developed not because it was easier to land but
because it would be easier to load bombs in the bay if the plane was level.
Consider trying to load a bomb bay in say a DC-3 or a trimotor... The bombs
would have to be lifted in place and tilted up to fit. At the same time
most fighters were the conventional more aerodynamic gear and any bombs they
carrier were smaller and mounted outside under the wings.

Noel

--


- 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

_________________
Noel Loveys
Kitfox III-A
Aerocet 1100 Floats
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kitfox-List All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group