Re: the Official Runway Distance thread

Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...>


To me it also makes sense to have the aelerons up for the flare so as to get
the tailwheel down and hold it down as early as possible. The aim I think is
not to three point it but get the tailwheel down first then stall the
canard. Once it is stalled the rest is easier.



From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Sam Hoskins
Sent: Sunday, 22 October 2006 1:54 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] the Official Runway Distance thread

I also land with full up reflexor. In fact, when I'm on downwind, abeam the
numbers, I pull power to 1,500 RPM, drop the speed brake, then set the
reflexor to full up and leave it there. I often land tail wheel first.
This is the scenario I use to get it slowed down the best.

Then I use my finger brakes and my unmodified tail wheel and the small
rudder to keep it on the center line.

I guess I'm just kind of contrary. Must be lucky too.

Sam Hoskins 1,600 hrs. (probably that many landings also)

Murphysboro, IL


From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <> com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <> com] On Behalf
Mike Dwyer
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 7:58 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <> com
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] the Official Runway Distance thread

Hey Jon,
Did I read that right, you land with full up aileron reflexer? This
makes you need more speed to three point it cause the tail will be low I
believe.... An experiment you could try would be to get a level in your
plane that reads 0 degrees pitch on the ground (your landing attitude).
Go up a few thousand feet. Set the reflexer to neutral and see what
speed you get when the level is 0. Then set the reflexer up and see
what speed it takes to get a 0 degrees. I bet the speed is much higher
with the reflexer up. Also, maybe your doing high sink rate landings.
I find that if I'm sinking fast then I can run out of elevator in the
flare so I use a little power to stop the sink rate. Try using some
power and keep the sink rate down, then chop the power over the numbers.

Another way to think of this is the reflexer reduces the lift on the
rear wing so you've got to go forward on the elevator to maintain a
balance. You've reduced lift overall so the stall speed has to be
higher. Just my opinion...

Here's my numbers N3QP

1. Q200 Taildragger - Cont 0-200 unmodified
2. Marge Warnkee 2 blade 58 Dia 64 pitch?
3. Reflexor - NO belly board. Always shoot for a three-point touchdown
attitude on base/final (ailerons reflexed neutral). Use the reflexer full up
to cruise faster (4mph) and to kill lift just after touchdown.
4. Typically <1100 lbs
5. Dry, asphalt/concrete
6. Aft
7. 85MPH indicated single place, 90 mph indicated two place over the
Sea level 59F takeoff single place 700', best landing 1600' Two place with
full full and baggage I'm happy with 3000' to land. Narrowest runway I've
ever landed on 60'. Chicken factor 10, I want to be an old pilot...

Jon Finley wrote:
1. Q2(GU-Taildragger) - Subaru EJ-22
2. Warp Drive 3 blade (about 13 degrees)
3. Reflexor - NO belly board - No numbers on the Reflexor but always shoot
for a three-point touchdown attitude on base/final (which is ailerons
reflexed UP (tail down))
4. Typically 1050-1100 lbs - Occasionally more
5. Dry, asphalt/concrete
6. Aft
7. Below...

My home airport is now E98 which has a 4340' x 37' runway at 4830' MSL. I
prefer to think of it as a 4350' x 40'.... ;-) Most of my flying here has
been at 7000-8000' density altitudes. I've got some things to test to see
if I screwed up my airplane (during the move here) but currently, I have
be at 100mph all the way to touchdown or I am out of elevator. That speed
plus focus on keeping it on the runway result in using the WHOLE runway.
Takeoff only requires about 2500' (a guess).

Previous home base (FCM) had 3900x75 at 900' MSL. Same setup, DA of around
1500-2000'. Had to be over the numbers at 90 mph and generally touched
around 85 mph. Typically used about 1500' on TO. Landings required about
2500'. If anything was amiss, I could chew up the whole length without a
second thought.

I NEVER do ANYTHING but fly the airplane until I am stopped (as in not
moving at all).

Jon Finley
N90MG - Q2 - Subaru EJ-22 Legacy
http://www.finleywe <http://www.finleywe
Mid-Valley Airpark, Los Lunas, NM

P.S. I tried to land on a 2500' runway a couple of times in MN (no wind)
could never get myself to commit as the end of the runway always appeared
approaching must too fast.

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <> com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <> com]On Behalf
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 7:14 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <> com
Subject: [Q-LIST] the Official Runway Distance thread

I've been looking through the archives trying to figure out what a
reasonable expectation for a minimum TO/LD distance is for these
planes. I have encountered everything from 700ft (Mike!) to 3500
ft. If you want, post the distance that YOU takeoff/land in.

Please also include:
1)if you've got a tri (you might be able to hit the brakes harder) or
2) Your prop--unless you like to land deadstick
3) any mods, esp the reflexor (and its setting) or VGs.
4) GVW during the TO/LD
5) field condition: wet, asphalt, grass?
6) whether you're pulling the stick aft, neutral, or fwd.
7) the airspeed @which you flare, hit the brakes, call your wife, and
do other important things.

Hopefully, we'll be able to identify what it is that those short
landing guys are doing right. But I've got a personal motivation
too. There's an airport by my house (CGS) that's 2607 x60ft and
could represent a high pucker factor.

Join to automatically receive all group messages.