Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
#1699543
That was a carpy landing in a taildragger in no wind.

The thing wasn't broken so can be used to practise again.
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1699549
It's hard to tell, but it looked to me as if the wind sock showed a gentle tail wind...
On second viewing I see there are two wind socks. The one near the touchdown point shows no wind and the further away one a tail wind.
Gusty thermic day?
I suppose he should have gone around after the first bounce?
Last edited by lobstaboy on Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By flyingeeza
#1699552
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:That was a carpy landing in a taildragger in no wind.

The thing wasn't broken so can be used to practise again.


Airfield elevation is 5688 feet...hot and high with such a tiny wing is not going to be easy regardless of the varying wind.
Landing speed is 110 mph!
Joe Dell, Lockhaven liked this
User avatar
By Sooty25
#1699562
I've obviously never sat in or flown one, but with that little forward vision, I'm amazed he doesn't fly a steeper, sideslip approach. His forward vision for the 10 seconds to touchdown must have been non existent. Done well to hit the tarmac!

Hot looking machine though, 400hp M14P giving 4,000fpm climb!
#1699565
flyingeeza wrote:
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:That was a carpy landing in a taildragger in no wind.

The thing wasn't broken so can be used to practise again.


Airfield elevation is 5688 feet...hot and high with such a tiny wing is not going to be easy regardless of the varying wind.
Landing speed is 110 mph!


Some combinations are just not sensible.
flyingeeza liked this
By Maxthelion
#1699566
He set himself up for flying it into the runway like that, by not flying either a curved or side slipping approach. With such a high airfield elevation, narrow runway, and hot aeroplane, why make it so much harder for yourelf by blocking your forward view and not attempting a wheeler?
User avatar
By Sooty25
#1699569
G-BLEW wrote:I wasn't there and I've never flown one, but from the comfort of my armchair I'd have probably had a go at a wheeler.


Doesn't look a very long runway to me, the extra speed carried, might have put him in the bushes!

It reminds me of a Bearcat, maybe they also designed the undercarriage for carrier type landings!
Chris Martyr liked this
User avatar
By ChampChump
#1699575
Hard, not-too-long runway, no apparent headwind, a fairly fast aeroplane (by my standards)...arrived in one piece.

Some of us can do that on a long, grass runway with a nice headwind and a slow aeroplane.

I'm not casting nasturtiums.
Last edited by ChampChump on Wed Jun 12, 2019 9:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
kanga, nallen, Charliesixtysix and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By PaulSS
#1699577
I think with that little wind I would have landed the other way. It may just be the camera angle but it looked like he was landing downslope. Small wonder he was keen to get on the brakes :D
By Bill McCarthy
#1699580
The landing was reasonably short really, and there was some serious braking taking place near the end as the tail was lifting a fair bit.