In order to combat my plane's tail heaviness I'm thinking about swapping my scott 3200 with something lighter. I've read all about the standard Maule tailwheels and their tundra tailwheel, as well as the Lang tailwheel. It sounds like people really like the Langs and the Maules can be good or bad. However, no one has described how these handle rough fields. There aren't many people around that land on large rocks or rough tundra for me to get an idea of how well any of these lightweight tailwheels hold up. I have heard that the Maules are nearly indestructible and know a guy that has landed his Tcart on some double fist sized rocks with a solid 6 inch Maule. Keep in mind I only have 8.50's on the mains and don't really plan to go any bigger. If anyone has some experience with any of the light weight tailwheels on rough fields I would love to hear about it.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Tailwheel Toughness
Collapse
X
-
Re: Tailwheel Toughness
FIRST WHY DO YOU WANT TO TAKE OFF A 3200 FOR ANY OTHER WHEEL? Now look at the f19 type certificate it has the weights for all the maul and scott wheels the mall hockey puck wheel is 6.9 lbs the scott 3200 wheel is 7 lbs the maul pneumatic is 8.2 lbs and maul tundra is 9lbs. Best way to lose weight is to diet.1940 BLT/BC65 N26658 SER#2000
-
Re: Tailwheel Toughness
I'll start with a justification. Let's assume I was was fully loaded with the CG fully aft at 20''. If I remember right the tailwheel is at 195'' or so aft of datum; that is a 175'' arm about the CG. I sit 23'' aft of the datum; that is a 3'' arm about the CG. 175/3 = 58, losing 2 lbs on the tailwheel has the equivalent effect on the airplane's moment as me losing 2*58 = 116 lbs! I only weigh 150 and have nearly 0% body fat! On long trips up here I really need every pound of cargo I can get and losing weight on the tailwheel significantly increases the weight I can carry, without having an aft CG.
I have checked out the weights on the TCDS for the BC's and F19's, but I am skeptical of a lot of the figures listed. The majority of them don't match up with what I have seen listed other places on the web. For some reason there are two weights listed for the Maule tundra tail wheel and I really wouldn't expect it to be so much heavier than the 6'' version. Maybe my expectations are off on that one. http://www.joea.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1881 It looks like I can save 2 lbs by switching to a Maule solid 6''. I've also read that the Lang is slightly lighter than the Maule, which is inconsistent with the TCDS.
The same guy that is flying the Maule solid 6'' on his Tcart has told me that one of the legendary bush pilots up here swears by the Maules. It's pretty hard for me to believe, but I have never heard of them breaking and neither have these other pilots. If the Maule tundra is really as heavy as the TCDS make it out to be I'm more inclined to try a Lang. I just want to get some anecdotal evidence to see if this is a reasonable idea.
Comment
-
Re: Tailwheel Toughness
Good to know, I have no doubt that enough abuse will break any tailwheel. I do like the stoutness of the 3200, and I would want one if I move up to 26'' mains, but I don't foresee that happening. What is the roughest stuff you landed on with your Lang?
Comment
-
Re: Tailwheel Toughness
I have had three mauls on my Tcraft first a hocky puck it shimmied some time when the mood struck it bought a used pneumatic maul of the later design no shimmy damper used two different springs still shimmied re arched the spring still shimmied bough a early style mall that has a shimmy damper built in and set it up still shimmy all this was with a new tire and steering springs caster was right also lots of new parts in to the wheels then bought a AK BUSH 3200 installed it with super cub steering spring and shimmy went away handles great tracks strait1940 BLT/BC65 N26658 SER#2000
Comment
-
Re: Tailwheel Toughness
My hard Maule tail wheel has been fine and doesn't shimmy. Just FYI.
Forgot to add that I am almost exclusively on pavement now, not much grass anymore.Cheers,
Marty
TF #596
1946 BC-12D N95258
Former owner of:
1946 BC-12D/N95275
1943 L-2B/N3113S
Comment
-
Re: Tailwheel Toughness
I have a Lang on my Pre-War BL-65. I love it and am looking for a spare. I rarely land on asphalt. but mostly grass and near-grass and good gravel. I don't think the Lang is very strong, but you ought to avoid beating up ANY tailwheel.Bob Waldron
1940 Taylorcraft BL-65
SkyHarbor airpark Webster, MN
eMail address nc18681 then an @ sign then HOTMAIL . Com
Comment
-
Re: Tailwheel Toughness
I forgot to mention -- My Lang does NOT have a 'break-away' feature, so it is a pain in the rear to pick up the tail whenever you want to move it backwards.Bob Waldron
1940 Taylorcraft BL-65
SkyHarbor airpark Webster, MN
eMail address nc18681 then an @ sign then HOTMAIL . Com
Comment
-
Re: Tailwheel Toughness
I found Tom's comment interesting, as I have a Maule on my aircraft. Here is the Test and Research portion of the NTSB info from that accident:
TESTS AND RESEARCH
Examination of the tail wheel and gear revealed the wheel separated from the fork just above the wheel's axle, leaving an upper portion of the fork, which remained attached to the steering arm, and a lower portion, which remained attached to the wheel axle. The upper portion of the fork reveled it was badly scored on the lower surface, and material had been removed from, and even formed over, the edge of the fracture face. The fracture faces, on both the upper and lower portions of the fork, displayed a darker area on the inside edge, adjacent to the wheel. Approximately 30 percent of the lower portion's fracture face was covered by a rust-colored grainy deposit, consistent with surface corrosion. In addition, the darkly discolored fracture region contained what appeared to be two ratchet marks. The dark discoloration and the presence of the ratchet marks are typical of fatigue cracking, with initiation from multiple origins on the inner edge of the fork, adjacent to the wheel. The surface of this portion of the fork, adjacent to the wheel, displayed the pitted surface and brown coloration typical of corrosion (rusting).
Examination of the entire fork revealed areas devoid of chrome plating, which once covered the entire landing gear fork. Additional areas were observed where a pitted surface and brown coloration typical of the corrosion process were evident.
When viewed from the aft, the periphery of the wheel displayed a smooth taper toward the fork by approximately 1/8 inch.Cheers,
Marty
TF #596
1946 BC-12D N95258
Former owner of:
1946 BC-12D/N95275
1943 L-2B/N3113S
Comment
Comment