On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 11:38:01 -0500 larry flesner <fles...@midwest.net> writes: > > >There are a couple of differences here. #1) I run my tailwheel steering > much looser than you, by preference. #2) You're runway is at ~500' ASL. > Mine is at 7200'ASL, which means that the ground speed and ground roll > before the rudder becomes effective is significantly greater. > >Jeff Scott > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > My ground handling experience in any type of aircraft would all be at > a density altitude of less than 3000 feet so I have no idea of how > much effect the higher altitudes have on ground handling. I would > like to hear your thoughts on why you prefer a looser tailwheel > connection.
It's primarily a matter of preference. There isn't a right or wrong. My Starduster used to have fairly tight tailwheel steering with a Scott 2000 tailwheel which has a single arm to support the tailwheel axle. On occasion, when landing with a crosswind, the tailwheel would touch down cocked off just enough that it would knock the hard rubber tire off the rim and leave me rolling out grinding down the aluminum hub. First time I did that was at a fly in where they had all of the Experimentals go do a fly by. On landing (in front of a crowd), sure enough, I hear a grinding from the tail and see my tailwheel tire go bouncing between the flying wires as it passed me. I loosened the springs to address that problem. In time, I got to where I prefer for my tailwheel steering to be more of a suggestion to turn rather than forcing a turn. Anything more feels like it's oversteering. I will probably be eliminating the springs from the tail on my KR this summer anyway. I'll at least try it that way for a while. Jeff Scott
