Re: Another tailwheel discussion
I took this discussion out of KFfan's intro thread to stand on its own...
Re: Another tailwheel discussion
WOW
I am going to look at that phenomenon tomorrow when I make my daily check. Have to make sure she didn't kick the covers off overnight....
Re: Another tailwheel discussion
So Larry, any particular negative experience with the Matco? I have a couple hundred hours on my old one with no issues but not on a Kitfox which is an entirely different bird all together.
Thanks
Re: Another tailwheel discussion
Paul - This was turning into a very good, very informative thread on the merits of tailwheels. I wanted to make it something that can be searched for, for future reference.
S'all good. :)
Re: Another tailwheel discussion
Very interesting thread, I've got a mate with a KF and he has the cam removed on his maule TW ,he gave me a real rev about mine and as I'd never heard anything about them I just figured he'd made a bad landing and got a scare. As it is I have never really like the maule wheel on mine and have a new matco double sided pneumatic for my aircraft, hopefully it works well
Re: Another tailwheel discussion
Just to give a voice to those with Maule tailwheels that "behave".
I have had 2 and not had any problems. Just got lucky, I guess, since I did not know I needed to check them.
One on a Maule M7 235 (about 150 hours).
One on the KF for 700 plus hours now without any problem.
I bet I'll check mine at next annual.
Re: Another tailwheel discussion
Quote:
Originally Posted by
N981MS
Just to give a voice to those with Maule tailwheels that "behave".
I have had 2 and not had any problems. Just got lucky, I guess, since I did not know I needed to check them.
One on a Maule M7 235 (about 150 hours).
One on the KF for 700 plus hours now without any problem.
I bet I'll check mine at next annual.
That's what makes this subject so difficult, as some people have had good experiences with it, and others didn't.
Unfortunately most that had trouble with the Maule probably didn't even know the tailwheel was the fault of their problem.
Worth mentioning, I have a Highlander that has a Maule tailwheel. A friend of mine that flies bush planes for a living was leary of flying that very Highlander from hard surface because it was so squirrely, yet he's flown taildraggers his entire life. When I bought the plane the first thing I did was to pull that cam off the Maule tailwheel. Flew it home just fine, then tested it by leveling the fuselage, and sure enough, with the cam in place it would unlock with no weight on it. I'm still flying it with the Maule, but will probably put a Matco on it before I sell it.
Paul
Re: Another tailwheel discussion
I'm not a big fan of Maule 6" tailwheels, but they have been used successfully on many different aircraft types for decades. It was the failure of a Maule tailwheel that preceeded the death of Ken Brock , a friend & well known aircraft builder, pilot, & parts manufacturer out of California. I don't like them, for that & a couple of other reasons, but the locking mechanism doesn't have anything to do, directly, with weight on the tailwheel. It is similar to several other designs in that it "breaks" at a specific angle of rotation. If set up properly - proper ratio between full rudder deflection & deflection of the tailwheel, along with proper spring tension - it won't break without some sideways force (i.e. - application of brake) while deflecting the rudder fully. This causes the wheel to rotate a little further (against spring tension) to the point where it breaks into full-swivel. Doesn't matter if weight is on the tail or not, although weight will usually decrease spring tension due to the geometry of a tail spring & the control horns on the rudder. Aviation Products, Lange, & some others work similarly. Scott & Matco work a little differently. I may not be clearly understanding what you're explaining, Paul, but set-up does definitely make a difference. Additionally, all bets are off if your wheel assembly is worn out, just like many things mechanical.