Tailwheel a *****cat on grass but a wild animal on pavement

[azsportpilot]

I am a Sport Pilot CFI with over 500 hours of tail-wheel time in quite a few different models, but this one is really challenging

I have a new student with a really nice 1999 Kitfox 3 w/ 80hp 912

You could not ask for a more stable, gentle tailwheel plane when on the grass, but paved runways are a different story

The mains track straight and true but as soon as the tailwheel touches down it swerves radically from left to right, as it slows down it gets even worse

I have flown Kitfox’s before but I don’t remember any abnormal handling characteristics

When preflighting, the tailwheel assembly and associated cables & springs all appears normal

Any ideas?

(I previously mentioned this elsewhere in an unrelated post, but felt this question should be in the "General Discussion" area, if incorrect area moderator please move)

[Dave S]

John,

There has been lots of technical discussion about diagnosing tailwheel issues and setting up tailwheel assemblies on Kitfox aircraft on this list.

You might find a lot of good information archived if you would like to use the search function - start a search on "tailwheel" and I am sure you will see a bunch of information that might be of interest to you.:)

Sincerely,

[kmach]

What make and model of tailwheel ? What type of tailwheel spring ?

If the geometrics are not correct , than you can have allot of problems. The main issue is usually the tailwheel vertical axle angle, it should be very close to straight up and down .

[Av8r3400]

Suggestion 1: Check the orientation of the rudder to brake peddle position with your feet. You can adjust the brake masters and rudder cables to position everything better to you as an individual.

On my yellow plane with the "C" style brake peddles the more right rudder you apply the more the left brake extends into your feet. Couple this with a tailwheel that unlocks with a hair trigger and it can be a tricky little devil in inexperienced hands.

After I tweaked the brakes and rudder cables for my short legs, handling was much better.

Suggestion 2: IMO, the early planes (I - IV-1050) lack enough tail to be an effective wheel lander. The rudder runs out of authority much sooner than the elevator which means the yaw control is gone aerodynamically before the tail wheel would come down.

I have wheel landed my plane, but I see no reason to do it as a norm. I definitely do not in a cross wind. The 3-point lands slower and gets the wheel on the ground and the tail under control sooner. Again, IMO.

[azsportpilot]

I don't know, I'm guessing whatever came with the Mk 3 kit in 1999

it is solid non-inflatable

the student/owner just ordered an inflatable 6in Matco.... this one

http://www.matcomfg.com/TAILWHEEL6PNEUMATIC-idv-3373-13.html

should be here soon, hopefully improving the situation

[kmach]

The Matco tailwheels have worked very nice for me.
I have had the WHLT-LD , now converted to the WHLT-8D . I rigged them according to the Matco instructions. They have a video on their website that was helpful. I hope it fixes the problem for you.

[azsportpilot]

the one the student/Owner ordered is the WHLT-6P

any opinions, did he get the right one?

[t j]

Another thing to check is main wheel alignment. Here's a how to thread.
http://www.teamkitfox.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=2802&highlight=align

[azsportpilot]

thanks for the link TJ

i suspect there may be an alignment problem, it is so bad on the pavement that it's hard to believe it is just the tailwheel causing the problem

it really wants to dart off

[Peteohms]

I used to have the same problem on my Kitfox III. some of it was my big clodhoppers touching the brakes on landing. The rest was tailwheel. I have a new Matco 8" and apparently I don't hit the brake with my feet anymore. No problems anymore.

[av8rps]

I agree tbat you need to make sure the tailwheel is set up as recomended, as that can make a huge difference in handling. Also the same goes for checking landing gear for being straight (there have been many issues with that over the decades).

But if it were me, and it is a Maule tailwheel (as I suspect it is), just remove the swivel cam plate with the one screw on tbe back of the pivot shaft, and then go out and fly it. If it is now a *****cat on pavement too, the problem is in the tailwheel . Either with tbe setup, or with tbe tailwheel. All removing that cam plate does is disable the full swivel function, the tailwheel still turns with the rudder. That tailwheel has wrecked a lot of Kitfoxes, Avids, and even a few Highlanders. And many pilots thought it was just them, when it wasn't.

[azsportpilot]

Interesting, so the Maule tailwheel problems (which are legendary) are due to the full swivel function?

we are going to upgrade to a pneumatic Matco anyway

will the Matco also have full swivel? does it stay locked more reliably? better cam?

[n85ae]

Never had ANY problems with my Maule tailwheel in ten years, the legendary
problems ... to me would be more mythical than legendary. Maybe people just
don't set them up right ....

Jeff

[azsportpilot]

I suspect you are right... about the set up being part of the problem

yesterday the owner/student removed the small but noticable amount of slack out of the tailwheel springs/chains

we flew it again this morning and its much better, we will work on main gear alignment and removing the tailwheel castering cam this week in the hopes of improving it further until the Matco Pneumatic TW gets here

[av8rps]

I agree that setting it up properly is important, but if you read Budd Davissons pirep on a Maule, even he discovered the tailwheel issue.

http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepMauleM-7-235C.html.

Here's the paragraph in that pirep that gives it away

"Another semi-strange thing happened when I was flying it in a switchy little 7 knot, 90° crosswind. I'd touched down and it tried to turn into the wind. I put in rudder, then more rudder. Soon, the rudder was against the floor but the airplane was still turning left. Since everything was happening so slowly, just for the heck of it I let it continue to see if the rudder or tailwheel would catch it. They didn't and I had to tap the right brake which straightened it out immediately. The demonstrated crosswind component of the airplane is only 12 knots, which is probably conservative, but it does require some pilot attention in that area."

So the way I read that, Budd experienced a small sampling of a Maule tailwheel issue. But he didn't really recognize what was happening. And being Budd, who is teaching in a Pitts S-2 when he's not writing, he easily overcame the issue. But he was flying a Maule aircraft with a Maule tailwheel set up by Maule! Shouldn't they be able to at least get it right on their own airplane? There's a reason so many Maules get wrecked and insurance companies don't like insuring them unless they have a nosewheel. Now don't get me wrong, I like Maule airplanes. But their tailwheel has a lot of issues. It is legend, not myth.

I don't like bashing anyones product, but in this case I would be doing a disservice to my friends here not to explain the truth of what is known and proven as an issue with the Maule tailwheel.

Fortunately, some Maule tailwheels work well for some guys. Unfortunately, thinking they all work well doesn't help those who are having issues with theirs.

[av8rps]

Interesting, so the Maule tailwheel problems (which are legendary) are due to the full swivel function?

For the record, I have never experienced a Matco tailwheel do what the Maule does. And I have never heard of people having the same issue with the Matco as the Maule has.

And granted, anyone can ground loop any taildragger. But when equipped with a Maule tailwheel that isn't working right, it is HIGHLY LIKELY an average pilot is going to have a problem keeping that airplane in one piece. I know that for a fact as I have flown good ones, as well as bad ones. So I can tell you, if you get a bad one you will wanna kiss the ground when you get back on the ground without wrecking anything.

I will fly an airplane equipped with a Maule tailwheel, but not unless I get the chance to test it with the fuselage leveled, or I remove the cam plate. In fact, my Highlander has a worn out Maule that works just fine with the cam plate removed. But two of my friends that are high time tailwheel guys (one is a for real bush pilot in Canada) were scared to death to fly the Highlander on pavement. As soon as I bought the Highlander I removed that plate and it is just fine on pavement. But I do have a new tailwheel to put on it one of these days.

But again, if you disable the full swivel feature by removing that cam plate from tbe Maule tailwheel, you will not have that issue. I proved that so far on 3 different airplanes. They all were monsters that couldn't be tamed. But remove that simple little cam and they went from scary to easy instantly.

The simple test on a Maule tailwheel is to have someone move the rudder pedals back and forth full travel while having the fuselage leveled. If the tailwhhel "breaks" into a full swivel in that test you have something wrong (typically it will only do that in one direction not both). The full swivel feature should only engage with inertia pushing on the tailwheel (only on the ground). It should not unlock with rudder movement alone. But apparently if you have too much rudder throw one direction or the other, the swivel feature will engage. And contrary to what most would think, the springs and chains being tight will make it worse, not better.

If it does unlock with rudder you probably need to reduce the rudder horn throw / travel, or you may have some worn tailwheel parts. Or the angles the tailwheel is mounted could be an issue?

[n85ae]

Maule is a 100% perfectly fine tailwheel if it is set up correctly. It's really
a disservice to people to keep badmouthing them. Yes if you ignore the
setup you can have problems, but you can have problems with lots of things
if they aren't setup right.

I'll credit your comment about checking it, but to simply suggest Maule is
bad, is really off base.

I have one. It is a good working, rock solid, very rugged tailwheel, and
it didn't cost as much as a Scott, I've been happy with mine since day
one.

Regards,
Jeff

[HighWing]

I used to have the same problem on my Kitfox III. some of it was my big clodhoppers touching the brakes on landing. The rest was tailwheel. I have a new Matco 8" and apparently I don't hit the brake with my feet anymore. No problems anymore.

I have been watching this thread with interest. I switched to the Homebuilders Special tailwheel from the Maule with about 200 hours on my first Model IV and put the same tailwheel on my current IV with no issues with Maule or HBS in 1100 hours. That said, though, with the new airplane it came with the then - 1992 - standard "C" rudder pedals rather than the "E" pedals I had on the first IV - 1993 vintage. With the new - older vintage - airplane, I had no end of problems with the brakes. Locking up, linings cracking, over heating causing fluid leakage were all consistent with riding the brakes. With the hours I had on the Model IV, my brake pedal problem wasn't reflected in control issues, though. I wonder if the pedal angle and the almost certainty of taxiing while producing some unintended braking might possibly be something to look at as well. I say this because, as I recall, the original post mentioned an abrupt turn one way, then the other. That would be consistent with inadvertent braking on one side while landing, then with the unexpected movement of the airplane, reflex rudder to the other side, again with inadvertent braking. this phenomenon wouldn't be as noticeable on grass. I suggest this might be worth checking. An easy first check would be to simply touch the brake disk after landing, checking for excessive heat.

[azsportpilot]

Lowell,

I think inadvertent braking may have played a role in some of our pavement landing problems.... there is very little room for your feet on the rudder pedals on this model 3... I think they call them "C" pedals.... the toe brake has an arm on the side that is easy to accidentally actuate while resting your foot on the lower part of the pedal

I think shoe selection becomes very important with this type of rudder pedal arrangement (no work boots etc)

that said.... even after we made sure we were not depressing the brakes, it still seems that the tailwheel will on occasion unlock and go into full caster mode on rollout causing a lot of stress after a perfectly good landing

[kmach]

I flew my kitfox in socked feet for quite a few hours at the beginning .

I wore too combat boot style of footwear when I went to test fly and purchase , so I flew it in socks, I liked the sensitivity or feel for the pedals in socks :)

I have since graduated to a nice comfortable thinner soled walking shoe :D

Maybe this would help in getting the "feel"

[av8rps]

Jeff,

I get that your tailwheel works good. That is great, and I'm happy for you.

But I know FOR A FACT that some Maule tailwheels have issues with going full swivel in the air. This isn't just speculation. Did you not find Budd Davisson's comments about having the rudder pedal all the way to the floor while the airplane continued in the other direction a bit odd? How would you explain that? Remember, that was on a factory built Maule aircraft.

I already am well aware of multiple aircraft equipped with Maule tailwheels having that same issue, but if you don't believe me I would think Budd Davisson's comments about flying a Maule and having "a problem" with it while landing should support what I'm saying.

It is not a disservice to point out the issue associated with the Maule tailwheel. In fact it is just the contrary. I personally know of two homebuilts that were destroyed by this issue with the Maule tailwheel. During the FAA's crash investigation of the 1st one a very experienced aircraft mechanic PROVED that the tailwheel on the aircraft could unlock prior to landing, which resulted in the pilot losing control.

Unfortunately, because it was a homebuilt they never looked further to find out exactly why it would unlock in flight, and just assigned blame to the Master CFI tailwheel instructor as a loss of control issue. But later the aircraft owner, the flight instructor, the aircraft mechanic, and myself inspected the aircraft further to learn the Avid Flyer had about 2 degrees more rudder throw one way than the other. So in flight when using full rudder delection the tailwheel would unlock every time the rudder pedal was full deflected in that one direction. The other pedal being full deflected would not unlock it.

To everyone reading this, I just don't want to see anyone get hurt or to damage their airplane because of this issue. I've been flying Avids, Kitfoxes, and Highlanders for the past 31 years. I've been around these things longer than anyone on this forum, and have flown pretty much every combination possible of these airframes. I am not just on a witch hunt against Maule tailwheels. This is a real issue.

[azsportpilot]

Thanks for your brutal honesty

the student/owner I'm working with installed the Matco pneumatic TW yesterday

We flew it this morning for the first time, and all I can say is wow, what a difference.... I mean "night & day" difference (and 1 pound lighter)

In my humble opinion this is the best $210.42 any builder could spend on their KF (or any other plane with a Maule TW operated off pavement)

http://www.matcomfg.com/TAILWHEEL6PNEUMATIC-idv-3373-13.html

even just taxiing is easier and quieter, less clanking and rattling too

I know the Maule TW has its fans and I certainly do not want to offend anyone, but I cannot see any argument in favor of the Maule TW (except possibly cost)

[av8rps]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&rct=j&q=kitfox%20taildragger%20ground%20loop&ved=0ahUKEwj0vN7ImODMAhVF9YMKHVwkClEQtwIIHDAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DaA ctGWgfUDo&usg=AFQjCNFA8fewZ-GcWKmjP38hBHHg67NVJw

I'm glad to know someone enjoys my brutal honesty. It's not always popular :(

Sounds like the new tailwheel has helped to get the demon out of that Kitfox you're flying. I'm not surprised, but congrats!

Related to this topic, I just discovered a really good video of a Kitfox doing a full groundloop.. And then I think about what Budd Davisson described in his article about opposite rudder doing nothing, but brake did. If one pays close attention to the video of that Kitfox it appears that as soon as the tailwheel touched he went hard left until ending up in an unexpected groundloop To me that is a really good visual of what happens when a talwheel swivel unlocks in flight. But most do not have the great luck this Kitfox owner enjoyed...

[GuppyWN]

Jeff,

I get that your tailwheel works good. That is great, and I'm happy for you....

As a lurker THANKS! Sounds like a $200 tailwheel is cheap insurance.

[dholly]

Good to hear the new tailwheel made a positive difference. Why add an unnecessary level of difficulty for a student or transitioning pilot, right? I also made up a set of flat rudder pedal pads to avoid the 'hooked toe' issue for bigfoots using the factory toe brake pieces. That made all the difference in confidence for me as a new TD pilot. I think these two relatively easy and inexpensive changes might even be considered a 'must do' for a student pilot new to Kitfox (and maybe instructors too, don't ask me how I know! :rolleyes: ). A search here on pedals will locate a couple good threads with pics.

[azsportpilot]

so we flew it again this morning (tues 5/17) and landed several times on the paved runway

while it is much improved it is still a bit squirly

we landed and took a really close look at the maingear, particularly the alignment...... and discovered something

while looking at the underbelly where the mains come together we noticed that one of the bungies is a bit saggy (the right one) about a 1 inch difference between the two

this also affected the height from the ground to the wingtip.....about a foot difference in height at the tips! (right wing lower)

not sure how much this would contribute to the ground handling issues, but it would definitely impart a slight right bank until the weight was off the wheels

order placed, new bungies on the way

[jrthomas]

I've been concerned over my Maule tailwheel for some time. Full deflection of the rudder will allow the tailwheel to unlock and go full swivel. I'm a little gun-shy about doing hard slips, afraid I might get a great big surprise when the tailwheel meets the pavement. I've experimented with chain tension. Looser chains results in sloppy taxiing. Less slack much improves taxiing but also causes it to unlock much easier. So now, after reading all these horror stories about the Maule, I'm paranoid and ready to order a Matco, but which one? On Wick's site I'm looking at 2 that look good. Both 6 inch, part#MT-WHLT-6P has the pneumatic tire rated for 250 lbs. The other, part# MT-TWA looks like the same assembly except it uses a solid tire but it's rated up to 450 lbs. Both weigh around 4.7 lbs. I know my tail's not that heavy but is the tailwheel rated for 250 lbs. durable enough for my model 4/1200 912? My CG tends to be a little toward the tail so I'd like to keep a light tailwheel assembly. So I'd like advice from the experts. Thanks, James Thomas

[Slyfox]

I find that if you go over the numbers at 50mph you will do a real good 3 point. this morning I landed, thought it was going to do just great and I got down to land and pulled back on the stick, well it slightly touched and then went back up to about 1 foot off and then I relaxed the stick a little and then pulled back all the way, this time the tail touched first and did a pillow landing. Might of had something to do with a tail wind of about 3 mph. a little strange but ended up real sweet. well the last three flights were in my tri rv7 might have something also to do with it.
what I'm trying to say is if you come in to fast, over 50, these airplanes do have a bit of squarely after landing. for best control after landing shoot for 50 over the numbers, then float about 1 to 2 feet off the runway and when you pull back on the stick and it doesn't go up, go full back and let it land itself. :)

[Jerrytex]

I too am a bit freaked out now. I have never had any issues with the Maule, I guess... but reading this is a little spooky. One question I have is...so if you pull the swivel plate on the Maule, the tail wheel will not "break" loose and spin 360 at all? So spinning the plane around requires picking up the tail?

I too will probably go with the Matco once the consensus makes a recommendation. But in the meantime, if removing the swivel plate works, might just do that until I get the Matco.

[azsportpilot]

From our experimenting the Maule is OK if you remove the swivel cam.... but it is still just ok

lots of rattling and banging while taxiing, and handles quirky

we upgraded to the Matco and it is amazing, quiet, no rattling, smooth etc

http://www.matcomfg.com/TAILWHEEL6PNEUMATIC-idv-3373-13.html

this is the one we chose, I'm sure they are all great but this one was lighter than the Maule and just $210

I highly recommend it

[azsportpilot]

I too am a bit freaked out now..

well, yes but if you plan your u-turns carefully it's not too bad

we had about a 40 foot turn radius when "swivel-disabled"

works out fine most of the time

[avidflyer]

Using one brake, and pushing forward on the joystick and a blast of throttle will probably make it come around faster as well. Don't go crazy on it though. Jim Chuk

[n85ae]

Wow, so many anti-Maule people out there. If I build another I'm putting a
Maule on it again just to be different. I'll even make it a point to adjust it
correctly! What a hoot. Just think, no shimmy, no ground loop-itis, and
all with a Maule.

the ONLY way a Maule is unlocking if you push on the pedals, is because it's
set up wrong. If you are disabling the unlock, then guess what you have got
the wrong ratio of arms, and the tailwheel is turning too much in relation to
the rudder. That's what's happening. It's NOT because the Maule is bad, it's
the guy that set it up is the problem, he didn't understand how it works.

There are certainly better tailwheels than the Maule, but the Maule is not
bad. It's just commonly setup incorrectly.

FWIW, I tend to like Scott tailwheels ... But I own a Maule.

Jeff

[jiott]

I don't get it! I know of several guys who purposely installed their tailwheels without the locking mechanism, so the wheel is free castering ALL the time. they seem to have no trouble at all. They are probably not Maule tailwheels, but if free castering on landing were the only issue then those guys would be groundlooping on every landing.

[n85ae]

Actually these days, if you don't have the correct app on your phone you'll
ground loop ...

[av8rps]

I too am a bit freaked out now. I have never had any issues with the Maule, I guess... but reading this is a little spooky. One question I have is...so if you pull the swivel plate on the Maule, the tail wheel will not "break" loose and spin 360 at all? So spinning the plane around requires picking up the tail?

I too will probably go with the Matco once the consensus makes a recommendation. But in the meantime, if removing the swivel plate works, might just do that until I get the Matco.

I didn't mean to scare all you Maule tailwheel owners. But I am very glad I got your attention so you are at least aware of what can happen, and why. For the record, I still agree with Jeff that if they are set up properly they can work well. Only problem is that no one seems to know what the magic formula is to set one up so it works propely? Bud Davissons article pretty much proves that Maule can't be counted on to tell you. And if you don't believe that, then someone needs to tell me why Maules are so well known for ground loops and so hard to insure unless they are tri-gear versions? Probably what we should do is to have Jeff take measurements from his (full deflection of rudder in degrees both ways, spring lengths, angle of pivot shaft on the ground and in flight position, angle of tailwheel spring in relationship to fuselage, etc, etc). And also to have Jeff do the test with the airplane leveled to see if he can get his to unlock with full rudder deflection. I'm guessing as happy as he is with his that his will not unlock unless it is on the ground and is being moved by inertia, the way a tailwheel is supposed to work. My personal belief is that airplanes with less rudder throw (e.g. 20 degrees vs 30) will make all the difference in if it works right or not. Springs / chains being too tight would be my guess at the 2nd biggest problem for making the tailwheel unlock in flight. But again, that is just what I think causes the issue.

But in the meantime you guys with Maule tailwheels can just remove the full swivel feature by removing one screw and that cam plate. That simple task will guarantee your Maule tw is never going to unlock in flight. Remember, I myself have a Maule tw on my Highlander. It was such a monster to handle on pavement that two of my friends who are high time tailwheel guys (who incidentally have time in their good handling tailwheel Highlanders, but they were not Maule tw equipped) that I finally just pulled the cam plate and tamed it way down. And if you saw how slopped out that tailwheel is after only 270 hours, you'd probably wonder why anyone buys a Maule tailwheel? They are nowhere near as durable as they appear. Unfortununately that tailwheel on my Highlander was just as bad when it was new, so I doubt rebuilding it will help at all.

But my real point is, with the fullswivel feature disabled the Maule tailwheel is much more manageable. The only thing you won't like after removing the cam plate is pushing it around as the tailwheell will either need to be moved with a tow bar, or the plane will need the tail lifted to push it backwards. I consider that a small price to avoid potentially destroying your airplane and/or hurting yourself.

[av8rps]

I don't get it! I know of several guys who purposely installed their tailwheels without the locking mechanism, so the wheel is free castering ALL the time. they seem to have no trouble at all. They are probably not Maule tailwheels, but if free castering on landing were the only issue then those guys would be groundlooping on every landing.

Have you ever flown a full castering tailwheel like you describe? I have, and I will tell you they are supposed to have a self centering detent to keep them straight when landing as without that they are more than a handful. If you truly have one with no centering detent, any airplane landing faster than 25 mph is going to have real issues, especially on hard surface runways. There's a reason a lot of short coupled taildraggers use locking tailwheels...

[av8rps]

Actually these days, if you don't have the correct app on your phone you'll
ground loop ...

That's funny :D

[Dusty]

At the risk of getting off topic,re bungees
Saggy bungys wont effect ground handling much but replacing sooner rather than later would be a good idea(there is a good video tutorial on You tube)don't make the safety cables too short(I think this has been well covered in this forum):cool:

[av8rps]

I too am a bit freaked out now. I have never had any issues with the Maule, I guess....

I really don't mean to scare you into giving up what could be a Maule tailwheel that may have nothing wrong with it. The easiest way for you to know if there is anything wrong with your Maule tw is to level fuselage and do a full deflection rudder test to see if you can get your tailwheel to unlock. Another simple way for you to know is to just pull off that cam plate and then go out and practice landings. If you find your airplane easier than ever to land, you've got a problem with your tailwheel set up, or the tailwheel itself is bad. Some guys have flown with bad tailwheels for years. And some are just really great pilots that have adapted to the idiosyncracies of the Maule, believing their little homebuilt is just a bit harder to land tban they'd prefer. They don't even know the difference

[azsportpilot]

At the risk of getting off topic,re bungees
Saggy bungys wont effect ground handling much but replacing sooner rather than later would be a good idea(there is a good video tutorial on You tube)don't make the safety cables too short(I think this has been well covered in this forum):cool:

agreed, but I think in the case of this one, where one bungy is worn enough to be an inch or so lower than the other under the belly, translating to one foot lower at the wingtip...

I think it is imparting a slight right bank after the landing flare, after the plane slows down and settles onto the gear, it is essentially rolling out with a right bank

[av8rps]

I agree that maintaining bungees is important to minimize handling issues of your taildragger. But I've flown a lot of these little planes that have had a loose bungee on one side, as well as on both sides. Handling was only minimally compromised.

Aside from the tailwheel, the most common issue for bad (or almost impossible) ground handling is having one gear leg toed in or out while the other one is straight. That will give you all kinds of excitement. I have a spare 912 Kitfox 4 1050 (1200 now) in my garage that not only had a bad Maule tailwheel but ALSO had one gear leg that was toed out over 3/4 of an inch :eek: Over the course of its short 200 hour life that poor Kitfox had been damaged repeatedly from severe ground loops. The builder did a fantastic job rebuilding it each time with new parts that actually upgraded the airplane. But then he'd wreck it again in another catastrophic ground loop. After 5 rebuilds, he fixed it a final time and sold it, probably thinking he apparently wasn't man enough to handle a taildraggin Kitfox. :(

Now for the 2nd owner: The guy that bought it wasn't afraid of an itty bitty toy like a Kitfox, as he was a pretty experienced tailwheel guy. But after only owning it a short time, he decided to sell it.

I learned about this particular Kitfox when a friend contacted me about potentially buying it, and asked if I'd talk to the seller for him since he didn't know much about Kitfoxes. My friend said the Kitfox had been damaged but the repairs were top notch and it appeared to be a very well built airplane. So I talked to the owner, who went on and on about this being the hardest tailwheel plane he ever flew, admitting that even though he had a bunch of time in aerobatic tailwheel airplanes (most recently a Super Decathalon), the Kitfox scared him to the point he didn't want to fly it anymore for fear of wrecking it. It had so defeated him that he was absolutely insistent it would only be sold to an experienced tailwheel pilot due to liabilty concerns. I suggested if my friend were to buy it that he should trailer it home so I could help him figure out the ground handling problems, as I knew no Kitfox should be THAT hard to fly. But because my friend flew a Luscombe for a bunch of years and was confident with his tailwheel skills, and because the seller felt totally comfortable with his tailwheel credentials, he elected to fly it home instead of trailering it.

Unfortunately on the very 1st landing after purchasing it he ground looped it bad enough that the fuselage had to be put in a jig to replace bent longerons and some other tubes, and one wing needed ribs and tip replacement of the last 3 ft. The repairs were done so well that the airplane was essentially back to new condition except for needing covering (which it still needs). In the process of jigging the fuselage the excessive landing gear toe out was discovered. They fixed that at the same time of the other repairs. I bought the Kitfox from my depressed friend thinking of it as as essentially a parts project, but later realizing how nice of an airplane it really was, I decided to one day put it back in the air. So one day I tested the Maule tailwheel on it to see if it was worth repairing (another one slopped out in only 200+ hours), and sure enough, when leveled to simulate flight attitude and to take pressure off, it was fine in one direction, but would unlock when the other rudder pedal was pushed to the floor.

Moral of that long winded story? It was absolutely no surprise to me why that Kitfox was such a beast that almost no one could fly it. Between the issue with one gear leg being toed out excessively and a tailwheel that would easily unlock in flight in only one direction, I'm surprised anyone could fly it successfully. It's sad how many years and dollars it took to repeatedly figure out that there was something dramatically wrong with this plane. Even worse is that I believe it made at least two pilots doubt their own abilities, which may be the reason they both quit flying? And on top of all that, I'm guessing the one guy that actually had enough skill to fly it the longest without damaging it is probably warning everyone he knows to stay away from a Kitfox. The whole story is just a crying shame, knowing it could have all been easily avoided...

[av8rps]

I don't get it! I know of several guys who purposely installed their tailwheels without the locking mechanism, so the wheel is free castering ALL the time. they seem to have no trouble at all. They are probably not Maule tailwheels, but if free castering on landing were the only issue then those guys would be groundlooping on every landing.

Check out this ground loop video. This happens so fast that its hard to tell, but it looks to me like the tailwheel went into full swivel and as soon as it does it begins to shimmy excessively ultimately resulting in a ground loop. The main point being that a fully swiveling tailwheel will not work on an average airplane without some sort of detent or lock mechanism to keep it straight as you touch down.

https://youtu.be/HkDQBXH02fE

(Or maybe he just had the wrong app on his phone?) :rolleyes:

[Dusty]

Great article (novel):) very enlightening and with a Disney happy ending.
I think kitfoxes are a great airplane that sometimes get a bad rap due to issues you mention, as would any badly setup plane.

[Av8r3400]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgguzIAOs1s

If you watch this video you can see me make a landing in a blustery cross windy situation back in '12. Note the tailwheel and rudder, both visible. The wheel clearly comes unlocked during the landing with deflection of the rudder.

The problem is that the rudder stops were filed back too far in order to give more rudder authority. This pulls the wheel chain too far unlocking the wheel. I didn't want to weld more material back on the stops or rework the whole design (which I did on the Mangy), so I learned to live with the behavior.

Additional mitigating circumstances are: the spring is beginning to sag at this point which induced the shimmy (which can also cause an unintended unlock) and the added weight of the tail ski.

The main saving factor is the slow landing speed of the plane and that I was lucky. Later that year I did loop the plane, luckily at a very slow forward speed with no damage, from the spring-sag induced shimmy. A new 1-1/2" wide three leaf spring fixed that.

The early IV's had rudder peddles that as you pushed on one the opposite brake peddle came back toward the pilot. This only exaggerates the problem of the ground loop. I learned that if the plane ever started coming around, neutralize the rudder and get on both brakes hard and come to a stop. The brakes were far stronger than the puny little rudder on this plane.

[n85ae]

You would think this is rocket science, it's not. I wonder how many people
JUST hook chains to the rudder horns REGARDLESS of what tailwheel is on
there, and ever think for a microsecond about the ratio of rudder to tailwheel
throw?

Blindly accepting that if the factory did it a certain way, that it is right, is
a REALLY common problem. Their design, is based on what was working best
in their particular build for the particular person who test flew it. That does
not mean it is the best setup for every situation. BUT you hear it over and
over in these threads that "it was desgned that way, therefore it's correct"

I rode in an early model fox, and it was very difficult to taxi, and it's simply
because the tailwheel moved way too much in relation to the rudder. The
solution for that is to weld on new horns, or drill some holes.

You do NOT want a lot of tailwheel movement relative to rudder, or in any
case I'll correct myself, and say "you need the PROPER amount of tailwheel
movement to rudder movement, as related to the pilot flying the plane"

Nobody ever discusses this, but it's rather obvious if "you turn off the phone"
and use some brain cells. :)

Jeff

[azsportpilot]

I agree that maintaining bungees is important to minimize handling issues of your taildragger....

this is a great testimonial

I hope you don't mind, I copy/pasted and emailed this to my student/owner

We have had so much ground handing problems with his KF-3 that I'm starting to wonder if this is why the previous owner sold this plane to him

we have replaced the Maule with a Matco and it is much better, but still the most challenging TW airplane I have ever flown

the Pitts S2 was an angel compared to this particular KF-3 (flown other KF-3's and found them very predictable on roll out)

[Slyfox]

nicely said. I will restate this, land as slow as you can. If in the 3 point that's easy, you fly in 50mph over the numbers and hang over the runway about 2 ft. when it's ready you pull back all the way and stall land. when doing so you have a plane that is the slowest possible for roll out. and a pretty darn good landing to boot. after that you just taxi off. if you want you can add brake but I don't, in fact I have about 2000 hrs since I put brakes on mine, I just don't use them.

now with the tail wheel, I have the experimental tail wheel from spruce and it's cheap. I keep the chains real loose, that in itself will give you some differential so the tail wheel to rudder is a lot less, it works. when I flew remotes I would do similar stuff to knock down the throw on the tail wheel to rudder, that did wonders. it is no different with our kitfoxes.

land slow and don't have a bunch of throw on the tail wheel and make sure it doesn't unlock when you put your pedals all the way to each side, that's the ticket. happy flying.

[jiott]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtokU8mIDQk

If you haven't seen this video on tailwheel setup, I think it is the best out there. It is specifically for a Scott (Alaskan Bushwheel) but applies to most locking/unlocking types.

In my opinion, before you fuss with anything on the tailwheel itself it is absolutely mandatory that you make sure your main gear toe-in/toe-out is set up properly. Then make sure your tailwheel spring (leafs) have the proper angle to cause the tailwheel caster axis to lean slightly forward in order to prevent tailwheel shimmy. A violent shimmy can cause all sorts of ground handling problems. AFTER all this is done, then fuss with tailwheel setup as in the above video.

[Slyfox]

the only problem I have in landing is those cheap nanco tires are horribly out of round. bump, bump, bump once I touch. I know I need to change them out, but it's hard to do it to tires that have a bunch of rubber left. aaarg

[TY2068]

If your Kitfox handles like this you may want to reconsider the whole endeavor.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1iJeuflwj5g

[av8rps]

You would think this is rocket science, it's not. I wonder how many people JUST hook chains to the rudder horns REGARDLESS of what tailwheel is on there, and ever think for a microsecond about the ratio of rudder to tailwheel throw? (SNIP)

Jeff

Jeff,

I agree that with a good knowledge of tailwheel design (as you obviously have), a Maule tailwheel can be set up to minimize ground loop issues.

Unfortunately most people do not have the knowledge or understanding you have about the Maule. Just like you said, they just bolt the tailwheel on and expect it to work. And honestly, can we blame them when they see thousands of other people do it that same way and have no problems? And how many decades has the industry promoted that any average person can build and fly one of these things? I think it is safe to say that they assume if tailwheel set up was so critical more information would be made available. But it's not. So they bolt the tailwheel on and move onto the next page of the manual.

And even if they had the intuition to dig deeper about setting up their tailwheel so as to avoid issues, last I looked Maule has little to say about setting up their tailwheel. And frankly, if they knew how to do that, wouldn't they fix their own airplanes?

http://www.avweb.com/news/features/Used-Aircraft-Guide-Tailwheel-Maules-224274-1.html

I really don't mean to sit here and continue bashing Maule tailwheels, as overall I think Maules are cool airplanes and I don't mean to inflict any hard to the good people building the planes. I just don't like their tailwheel. And not so much because it is impossible to make one work properly (you and others have proven otherwise), but more because the average guy is not likely to get it right. And all that does is give our planes a bad rap, increase our insurance rates, make the FAA wonder about homebuilts more than they already do, and worse, hurt people.

I have thought many times about trying to put together a Maule tailwheel set up instruction sheet in an effort to help others avoid problems with theirs. I'm pretty sure my comprehension of the design is good enough to do so. But being that I have not been impressed with the durability of the Maule tailwheel, I'd rather just change to a different brand of a tailwheel.
I had hoped this thread would help to convince others that may be having issues to go to a different brand as well. When you look at what we have invested in our planes it really is cheap insurance to replace the tailwheel altogether if you are having problems with yours.

[av8rps]

If your Kitfox handles like this you may want to reconsider the whole endeavor.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1iJeuflwj5g

That is another really good example of what happens when a tailwheel full swivels too easily. I'd much rather have a tailwheel that doesn't full swivel and have to pick up the tail to push it into a hangar than to deal with ground handling like that. Let's see, the tail of a Mini-Max has to be all of about 10 pounds?? Even a 90 lb weakling could handle lifting that tail...

It truly is amazing how many issues there are with taildraggers related to full swiveling tailwheels. Thanks for sharing another video of that with all of us.

[av8rps]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgguzIAOs1s

If you watch this video you can see me make a landing in a blustery cross windy situation back in '12. Note the tailwheel and rudder, both visible. The wheel clearly comes unlocked during the landing with deflection of the rudder. (snio snip)

Larry,

I don't know if I ever shared this with you, but before you bought that airplane when Johnny had it on his first taxi tests he almost took out a runway light while just slow taxiing. He was all flustered, telling me that he had the opposite rudder fully applied but it just kept heading for the runway light. That same afternoon we put the tail up on a barrel he had in the hangar and I proved to him that his tailwheel was unlocking one way (to the left as I recall) while just taxiing. I told him to fix it either by removing the cam plate or lessening throw, but I'm not sure what he did. But I do remember him being pretty upset by the whole thing.

So I'm not surprised it unlocked for you too. Apparently he never did what I told him.

[Av8r3400]

Jonny sold me the plane without a cam plate. So he did take it off (and lost it).

I got a new one and put it on for my hangar mates to easier move planes around.

The fine gentleman who now owns the plane got the cam plate and screws in a Baggie with instruction to wait for a while before he tries it. I think he'll do fine.

[av8rps]

this is a great testimonial

I hope you don't mind, I copy/pasted and emailed this to my student/owner....)

I don't mind you sending it at all. It's important to share information here that can help us.

Wow, harder than an S-2! There is definitely something wrong with that Kitfox if that's the case. I've got some Pitts S2 (and S1) time, and the Kitfox should be WAY easier based on my experience flying those. Not sure if you ever flew a Skybolt, but to compare a Kitfox to a biplane, I would say the Skybolt is similar in handling (I love how a Skybolt handles fwiw).

Here's a easy way to check main gear alignment; Make sure the main tires are inflated the same and then attach a 8 or 10 ft piece of pipe, angle iron, etc centered across the outside face of each tire. Then measure the distance between the pipes forward and rear of the tires. The distance should be the same front and rear of the axles at the same distance. Obviously the long pipe five feet forward and back of the axle will show an exaggerated toe in or toe out, but that's what you need to know. If you find one bent in or out that is probably a big contributor to the ground handling issues. I believe the gears today are built with no toe in or toe out, so ideally they should be the same measurement front and back on the pipe. My Model 4-1050/1200 I still have in my garage was toed out 3/4 of an inch measure one foot forward of the axle. That is A LOT of toe out for one wheel. I heard some were actually warped in the welding process, but it could also come from hitting a hole in the runway? Either way, it would only make sense that you wouldn't ever want wheel alignment to be that far off on your Kitfox. I wish I could tell you how well it handles with the gear aligned and a new tailwheel, but unfortunately that Kitfox is still awaiting my attention in the garage. (that's what happens when you have one to fly)

[av8rps]

Smart move to have the plate removed when delivered. In fact, losing the plate really isn't such a bad idea either ;)

[Slyfox]

If your Kitfox handles like this you may want to reconsider the whole endeavor.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1iJeuflwj5g

hay who put those rocks in my way, dangburnit

[Dave S]

Are you sure those piles are rocks?:D Looks like someone is using the runway for a horse pasture.:eek:

[Slyfox]

ok who put that poop in my way, dangburnit

[jiott]

Here's a easy way to check main gear alignment; Make sure the main tires are inflated the same and then attach a 8 or 10 ft piece of pipe.....

I would strongly suggest you don't lay the pipe across the face of the tires. Use spacer blocks and lay it against the wheel face. Iv'e seen tires with very uneven sidewalls; it could give a very false reading. You are really trying to evaluate the rolling axis of the axles.

[avidflyer]

If you jack up both tires at the same time, put some masking tape on the center of the tires, spin them with a pen held solidly on something so it doesn't move around against the tire, you will get a fine line that is exactly consistant on the tire. (not affected by sidewall bulges and such) Do that on both tires and then you con measure between the lines on both tires. To see which gear leg is more out of whack, you can tie a string on the tailwheel spring, and pull it forward down the center of the plane at the same hight as the axles. With the string tied off ahead of the tires, Measure to the string and you will see how front and back of each wheel compares. Hope I explained it well enough so it makes sense. I'm about to do it again on the Kitfox 1, I'll have to take pictures. Jim Chuk

[avidflyer]

I rigged up the thing I was talking about on the Kitfox 1 today, and snapped some pics while I was doing it. Found out that the left wheel has about
3/8" toein and the right side has none. I ended up drawing a pencil line on that cross 2x8, and put a nail on the line front and back of the tires. Making a mark on the tape and measuring it off the front nail, then rotating the tire so you can measure to that same mark off the rear nail should be very accurate. At least that's my story, and so far I'm sticking to it, although it is slightly modified from my earlier post. ;-) Jim Chuk

[jiott]

I don't want to complicate things too much here, but there are some differing opinions on setting the toe-in with weight on the wheels or not. I did mine like avidflyer with weight on the wheels (suspension) so it tracks straight after landing and weight is mostly on the wheels. I have had no ground handling problems whatsoever for 3 years now. However, there is a school of thought that it should be done with no weight on the suspension, simulating the first instant of touchdown. To me that makes little sense because nearly all ground handling/looping problems occur later on in the rollout. FYI, the toe-in/out measurements WILL be different with or without weight on the suspension.

[jiott]

By the way, you can jack up one tire at a time to get the marks on them by spinning, then set them back down on the ground to do the toe-in/out measurements. I snapped a chalkline in the floor for the plane centerline. Many ways to get the same job done.

[t j]

nicely said. I will restate this, land as slow as you can...

Here's my Kitfox hard to land story. Mine was a monster. I ground looped it severely and damaged the plane. I spent $5,000 plus a year working on and off to fix it better thnan new. Then I was afraid to fly it.

I went a got 15 hours dual from an old instructor with an old 1940 J3 Cub. He made me fly from the back seat only. Then I went to San Jose and got 7 more hours dual from an aerobatic instructor at Amelia Reed in a Model 4 kitfox.

Then I felt good about flying my kitfox. It was still a hand full but I felt confident until I landed kind of fast at an unfamiliar airport and got on the brakes a little to make the turn off and ground looped again. This time a slow one but scary as I found myself just along for the ride.

Then I checked the main wheel alignment and found the left wheel toed in about 1/2 -3-4 of an inch. I bent the axel cold in a vice with a sledge hammer to where both whels are now straight ahead.

It lands beautifully now. It's the easiest tail dragger I have flown to date.

Here's a video of what Sly is talking about. Slow the plane down and stay off the brakes. I have a Maul tail wheel set up properly. That is, it does not unlock at full ruder deflection unless I stab that brake and there is a little slack in the chains.

My landing check list FFFF...Fuel, Flaps (none for three point, about an inch or two for wheel landing) Fifty mph on final, Feet off the brakes. I'm usually about 40 mph over the numbers.

https://vimeo.com/12693781

[Jerrytex]

So I checked my Maule Tailwheel and made a video. First off, sorry about the plane running up in the background. I didn't even hear it but the camera sure picked it up. The second thing is....I didn't have anyone operating the rudder pedals but I double checked and when I push the rudder pedals, the rudder goes to the stops in back so by pushing the rudder, I am essentially doing the same thing as pushing the pedals.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e09o-SorNok&feature=youtu.be


I guess maybe I haven't had any issues since I really can't remember ever maxing out the rudder. And also when I slip, I slip to the left so on that side, it appears the lock is working. I went ahead and removed the swivel plate. Its a pain to push the plane backwards now but it will be fine until I can get a different tailwheel.

[t j]

Slipping left you're pushing right rudder aren't you?

[avidflyer]

I was moving my Kitfox 4 project around today, and noticed that when I pulled the rudder up against the stop, for a right turn, the 8" maule tailwheel unlocked with no side pressure. For a left hand turn, it took quite a bit of pressure before the tail wheel broke free. I'll have to fix that before it flys. Jim Chuk

[av8rps]

I sure am glad to see that people are investigating their taulwheels and wheel aljgnments.

These planes if set up properly should be easy to handle tailwheel aircraft. So if your Kitfox is difficult, there's something wrong with it. And as we've learned on this thread, it is most likely either a tailwheel not working properly, or a gear/wheel alignment issue.

And if yours is so bad you are thinking it may require an exorcism, you probably have both a tailwheel and a gear issue.

[Jerrytex]

"Slipping left you're pushing right rudder aren't you?"

I guess so....Hmmm? Well then I don't know because it sure was easy to break loose to the right. Maybe the slipstream of air keeps it back?

I am really starting to think that this tailwheel breaking free in flight is really not an issue. It sure seems like even if the wheel was sideways, it would straighten out and lock pretty quickly when it touched down. Especially with the elevator pushing the tail down.

[Slyfox]

Here's my Kitfox hard to land story. Mine was a monster. I ground looped it severely and damaged the plane...
very nice landing, bravo.

[av8rps]

"Slipping left you're pushing right rudder aren't you?" (Snip, snip)...
I am really starting to think that this tailwheel breaking free in flight is really not an issue. It sure seems like even if the wheel was sideways, it would straighten out and lock pretty quickly when it touched down. Especially with the elevator pushing the tail down.

Don't underestimate it becoming unlocked thinking it will straighten itself out. It can straighten itself if it is only slightly ctooked when it touches, but if it is a lot crooked when it touches you probably won't have time to react. I say that from experience...it's not fun to try and save the airplane when that tailwheel touches down really crooked. I'm pretty convinced that if I didn't have lots of tailwheel time in Avids and Kitfoxes that I would've rolled the thing up in a ball. But my experience saved that from happening, along with some perfectly timed good luck. If I was to estimare I believe 85+% of pilots would've destroyed that plane that day. Especially if they weren't as lucky as I was that day.

That article from Budd Davisson talking about how things were happening so slow is a good example of a minorly crooked tailwhhel on touchdown. But if you are in a gusty crosswind and you are dancing on the pedals more than usual, that's when its likely to be a bigger issue. Believe me, when that happens you won't have the deal like Budd described as "happening real slow". A good way to describe it is like what happened to me, as soon as the tail touched I was going so hard left that I ended up going full power and taking off 90 degrees from the direction I was trying to land. The tires actually screamed from the side skidding (I'm lucky the gear didn't collapse from the intense side loading on it). And the worst part, that day of test flying it happened more than a dozen times before we finally figured out to pull the swivel plate, making it immediately a completely different airplane.

The hardest part of this potential problem is that not everyone has experienced it when the tailwheel touches down really crooked. They've been lucky enough to experience only minor crooked, which is not even close to what you will experience if it is really crooked.

I just know that I hope to never again experience one of tbose situations ever again in my life.

[avidflyer]

I fixed the toe in problem on my Kitfox 1 today. This is how I did it. I remember that the Avid factory manager said to bend the axle with a long pipe slid over the axle. I've done it before on an Avid MK IV by tieing a rope to the tailwheel, pulling on the rope with both hands and the 8' long pipe up against my belly while I was on my knees on the floor. It was tough to get the axle to bend but I eventually got it. Today I used my head a little bit. I hooked a chain to the tail of the plane and hooked a cable come a long to the end of the pipe and the chain and tightened it up. It took about 4 tries because I didn't want to bend the axle to far, and when all was said and done, I have about 1/16" toe out between the two tires. That is measuring to a mark on the front of the tires, and then rotating the tires to the back (180 degrees) and measuring to those same marks. I didn't check the 6" maule tailwheel to see how easy it unlocks, but I will before I fly it. Jim Chuk

[av8rps]

It truly is amazing how many of the planes we like to fly, whether it be Kitfoxes, Avid's Highlanders, etc have something wrong with the gear and the tailwheel. Yours is just another good example.

And of course those that have a good handling airplane on the ground can't even understand what we are all talking about here, until the day they have the opportunity to fly a bad one. I've had a couple of these planes that were absolutely tailwheel *****cats, so when I one day test flew one that had a problem, I was completely caught off guard. There is a point where you can easily have too much confidence, and I learned that firsthand.

I'm so glad to see people checking their airplanes. It is especially critical to do that if you think you will ever sell your airplane, as the next guy may have a minimal skill level that will get them in trouble fast with even a marginal handling airplane.

[jrthomas]

Well, I did it today. I ordered a Matco. No real problem with the Maule but not sure what would have happened if I had used full rudder in flight and the tailwheel had released. I didn't want to find out. All this talk about the Maule has made me paranoid. So, mainly for my peace of mind, I bit the bullet. I called Kitfox and talked to Deb. They recommend the 8" single arm. I ordered the WHLT-8PL from Matco (Kitfox didn't stock it) which is the light weight version of the single arm. I needed to keep it light to keep my CG in check. All my flying is either off pavement or grass so no need to go heavy duty. I should be here in a few days. I'll let y'all know how it works out. James Thomas

[Jerrytex]

I ordered the same one too. Even if I never had or will have a problem with the Maule, the Pneumatic tire I am sure will be smoother and quieter. I guess any excuse will do to justify spending $250. Ha!

[HighWing]

Reading this thread with all the mechanical implications, there is one more possibility I want to throw out. This idea came up in a conversation I had yesterday with a friend and neighbor who has 1900 hours in is Model IV Kitfox. In the old days before CFIs with Kitfox experience lots of the new Kitfox flyers were essentially checking themselves out and finding challenges on landing. What came from that discussion was the realization that the Kitfox cowl and panel layout was not conventional from a “Cessna” perspective. The round panel didn’t give a level wing reference and the side of the cowl didn’t give a straight ahead reference. Most guys found that they were landing in a crab - lining up the airplane and runway with the side of the cowl that was not straight ahead, but tapered toward the spinner. This became readily apparent when I was forced to change from a neighbor and friend CFI I was using for my Biannual Flight Reviews. Don loved my Model IV and after me doing my thing, he always asked permission to play a little bit. One thing He loved to do was the rocking your wings routine over the runway first touching one wheel then the other. I could never convince him that he was always touching in a crab. This was proven by the fact that after each flight review - twice only - I was forced to replace both tires. The rubber at the outside of each tire was always ground off, exposing the cords.

The solution to the problem with lining up for landing was the tape on the windshield trick. This was done by lining up the airplane exactly facing a distant object – pine tree or pole, then sitting in the pilot seat and placing a 1/8” piece of tape - up and down - exactly over the tree. I never took off the tape on my first IV and on my new airplane I have the indicator pictured below.

[avidflyer]

I know that's a point that's stressed in the How to Fly a Kitfox booklet. If a guy is used to flying a single seat, or tandem configuration it will be a problem as well cause he is used to looking through the center of the prop. I had that issue with my first Avid until I put a mark on the windshield. Other wise I as wanting to see the prop straight ahead of me and so a bit of rudder would make it so. A quick glance at the ball just before landing helped as well. A friend of mine trained for his Sport pilot lic. in a Champ, got his ticket, and then bought a Chief. He had all kinds of trouble making the adjustment. One ground loop after another. Jim Chuk

[azsportpilot]

all good points about the round cowl, however...

we would touch down gently and straight as an arrow

all was well until the tail touched then it would swerve uncontrollably

no doubt that the round cowl takes some getting used to but this plane has a mind of it's own

every other KF I have flown was pretty gentle and easy

[jrthomas]

I ordered a new Matco tailwheel assembly 8 days ago. I was hoping to hear the UPS man coming down the drive any day now but no-show yet. I usually get some kind of notification either from the business that I order from or UPS with tracking information but nothing so far. So I decided to give Matco a call. The young lady politely informed me that it should be shipped sometime this week. I don't know about y'all but where I come from, that's pretty poor service. I almost asked her to please cancel my order but what's the use. I'd be right back where I started. I've ordered a lot of airplane parts over the years but unless something was not in stock (which I was usually told about up front) parts usually went out no later than the next day. When I call in an Amsoil order, it's usually on my front porch the next afternoon. Anyway, I'm peeeed at Matco. If any of you plan on ordering from them, you might want to ask up front when your order will go out. They don't seem to be in too big a rush. I'm a disappointed and dissatisfied customer. I hope I'll be happy again when I get it and try it out. James Thomas

[Jerrytex]

I am in the same boat. I got an email on May 24th. It said that they they have the parts in stock and they would assemble and test the wheel and ship in 3-7 days. That was 7 days ago and I have not heard anything else. There was however a weekend and a holiday in that time span. Guess I'll have to wait and see.

[jiott]

Did you guys try Kitfox. They stock one of the Matco tailwheels for the standard kit. I'm not sure about the part number being the same as what you ordered, but its worth checking; much better service I'm sure.

[jrthomas]

Hey Jim. Yea, I talked to Deb. They didn't stock the one I wanted. They carry the 8" single arm but it's the heavier one. I believe it was 7.7 pounds. It would probably be fine on the models 5's thru 7's and Super Sports with their engines set more forward. I ordered the lighter 8" single arm that weighs 5.7 pounds (part#WHLT-8PL). I didn't want to go any heavier and hopefully a little lighter than my Maule for CG reasons. My model 4 has all the Speedster options (I built as a long wing) with the airfoil tail surfaces that I assume adds a little more weight to the tail. My CG is well within range but runs a little more aft than I'd like. I guess I should have removed my Maule and weighed it for myself. Anyone know what they weigh? James Thomas

[avidflyer]

The times I've dealt with Matco, they have been very good. Maybe with the holiday and such some key people were on vacation or something. I don't think they are a huge company. One guy missing might make a big difference. I'm tempted to say cut them some slack, but I won't. ;-) Jim Chuk

[av8rps]

This is funny, but not...

I just came to realize that one of the hardest to fly tailwheel airplanes, the Pitts biplane, commonly uses a Maule tailwheel :eek:

I can't even imagine what having the Maule unlock on one of them in flight is like. You are totally blind in the 90 mph flare, not able to see over the nose at all, so you have to drive it like a train looking only down the side of the fuselage and lining it up with the runway stripes to know if you are straight or not when you touch down.

I wonder how many Pitts with Maule tailwheels have scared the bejeezus out of good pilots that thought it was them, not the airplane?

[jrthomas]

I replaced my Maule with the new Matco yesterday. It's the lightweight 8" single arm. It weighs 5lbs 7ozs verses 5lbs 14oz for the Maule. I needed to keep it as light as possible to help out on the CG. I had a minor issue with the bolt. The Maule used a 7/16" bolt but the Matco was drilled for a smaller bolt so I had to drill it out. Then the bolt was too short so I had to use a slightly longer one. I still need to make some adjustments on my spring tension, too sloppy now. I think the Matco will do better with less slack. I did some taxiing and it did very well except for the too loose springs. It easily went full swivel just like it should with stick forward then locked back with a touch on the opposite brake. So far I like it a lot. Pneumatic 8" should be better than the solid Maule 6". I sure is pretty if that counts. James Thomas

[Jerrytex]

I haven't put my Matco on yet but I noticed that it looks like it has a bushing that could be pushed out?

[jrthomas]

I drilled the bushing out. Maybe I should have pressed it out but I'm to impatient for that. I have the updated tailspring with 3 leaves, one short leaf and 2 full length. It already used the 7/16" bolt so I couldn't see any choice but to drill the Matco out to use the larger bolt. I used my drill press to keep it straight. It shouldn't wallow out if it's tight. I think I'm gonna like it. James Thomas

[Geowitz]

Is the bushing there for strength and separation of the disimilar metals? Looks like a location where things could get wallowed out over time even if you think it's tight.

[jrthomas]

You're probably geowitz. Maybe I should have contacted Matco first. The bushing is probably a harder steel. Let's see if anyone else knows. I really don't see any way it can move around any as tight a fit as it is. It's grooved so the tail spring can't squirm around. James Thomas

[Geowitz]

That bracket being cast may be an issue with the bolt tension as well...

[PapuaPilot]

It would be good to contact Matco about taking out the bushing. Bushings are made as the part that can wear and be replaced if need be. You could be asking for problems by not having the bushing there. If you need a bigger hole Matco may want you to ream out the hole and bush it to the larger size.