David,
If I understand tailwheel power correctly it is in the leveraging as
opposed to arc which would be problematic on narrow sharp turn
taxiways.However assisting straight line takeoff and landing runs at
the expense of manuevering. I welcome your reminder to prudently
stick to plans making the 4:1 ratio concept for discussion only
item.It maybe in the feet agressive while under rudder control and
gingerly while under tailwheel control after the wing stops lifting.
Bringing new meaning to the term "two step." An undiscovered frontier
for us at this point.With outrigger gear I wonder if that amplifies
minute toe variations as it does differential braking action.Fishing
line a better choice.
Thanks and Season's Greetings

CE in SS



--- In Q-LIST@y..., "David J. Gall" <David@G...> wrote:

CE:

I'm not so sure that 4:1 is advisable. There are a LOT of other

factors that

I did not mention that must be considered when choosing a

rudder/tailwheel

ratio. Four-to-one might seem best for the ONE consideration that I

listed,

but even that has mitigating factors to consider. I did not address

the

issue of control power at all; that factor alone will significantly

affect

the preferred ratio. What if the tailwheel's control power is only

1/4 that

of the rudder - then the preferred ratio would be back up to 1:1.

Neil's is the first report that I've seen of a tailwheel that might

be too

effective. I would not recommend that you do any design changes

based on his

report and my comment alone. He has a non-standard tailwheel setup

that just

might be the only one like it in the world. Like they say on the

mileage

sticker on cars: "Your results may vary."

The 11-13" camber measurement is done during new construction. If

you have

already built your plane, it is sufficient to measure the camber at

gross

weight and verify that it is neutral or slightly positive.

I'm not sure that the toe changes as much as you seem to indicate.

Good luck,


David J. Gall
P.S. Did I say to use string...?
http://david.gall.com/files/Airplane/quickie1.txt


-----Original Message-----
From: dfwsfug [mailto:dfwsfug@y...]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:32 PM
To: Q-LIST@y...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Toe


We have not taxi tested yet or flown.Wondered about the weight

verses

empty on the toe of the mains. If we set for neutral toe empty. That
will give us some positive toe (toe-out) under load at increasing
rate up to gross which also gives us a higher landing/rollout speed
when extra directional help needed.The camber of 11-13 " was
mentioned how is that measured? We can use the Gall-string method

for

toe but what for camber? We have a direct rod link rudder to solid
tailwheel.Ratio 1:1 no springs. Considering taking the advice to
build another fork using pneumatic tire and change the Rudder to
Tailwheel ratio 4:1 for initial self checkout period.Can bolt either
on.
CE in Southern Saskatchewan


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Q-LIST-unsubscribe@y...

Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...

Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/