Ed. I don't like the change to the forum you did.
I used to be able to reply selectively, now any attempt will end in an open discussion. Why did we do this change? Solving what problem? Hartmut From: Ed Burkhead Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2010 5:01 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ercoupe-tech] Re: Raising the tail: Two more questions In response to Kevin's message: Please check out the landing gear discussion in Stick and Rudder. What you say is valid but so is Langewiesche's point about the tail dragger gear being a takeoff gear. All in all, I really want my the window sill level on the ground on any Coupe of mine! I could handle quite short fields with my climb prop and, in a crosswind, the behavior of a tail-drooping Coupe can get into the dangerous range. Ed > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Kevin > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 9:07 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ercoupe-tech] Re: Raising the tail: Two more questions > > Ed, > > I'm afraid I don't get the logic of your first paragraph. A tail dragger is not designed > for any optimal take off angle from the three point attitude. A tail dagger is designed > as a tail dragger mainly because it is easier to design and cheaper to build. They also > are better suited for unimproved fields because you can get the tail wheel off the > ground faster than a nose wheel. You do not take of in a tail dragger with the tail > wheel on the ground. You have to lift the tail and accelerate and then rotate. And just > like in a nose wheel airplane if you do it too soon you risk flopping back down. > > Kevin1
