This is the first time I have flown one of these
since I was fourteen or fifteen. I forgot how bad it
was.

Horrible handling airplane. Terribly un coordinated.

Don't learn in it unless you can afford to spend twice as much time
and money. The flying skills you learn are then useless for flying any
other
type of modern aircraft.

However it is fun and challenging :)

Paul Lamar
--



Flying something like a Cub or Champ will make the automatic parts of your
brain ready to work without you thinking about it. You call it bad, but
it's actually perfect for flight training. If you can make the Cub do your
bidding, the only problem you'll have with the RV is getting used to its
small and light control inputs. Some people might over-control in the
first
few moments of transition. Hopefully you will get you a bit of stick time
in another RV before having to do it solo.


Matt-

The reason it is bad is nobody designs an airplane today with out due
diligence to coordination and aero balance of the controls. There is no
upside to uncoordinated and unbalanced controls. It is like an old
unstable
car. Yes you can learn to drive it but why do that if it can be made
stable. Therefor I disagree with the idea it is perfect for flight
training.


Get lessons in a C172. After you have your license get checked
out in a Cub if you feel the need to find out what it was like to fly in
the
1930's. Build a replica of the Wright Flyer if you really want to learn to
fly a bad airplane. Yes it was the first barely controllable airplane but
technology improves.


The other Cub drawback is the early versions did not
have flaps so the flare is very nose high which totally obscures the
runway
ahead. In fact Piper lost a huge law suite about 30 years ago because of
this factor. As I recall it bankrupted them. This had a very negative
effect on the light plane industry. Cessna stopped building and selling
piston powered aircraft. Congress had to enact a law prohibiting liability
suites for products 17 years or older.


Paul Lamar



Hi Paul, I think the big suit at that time was against Cessna for
failing seat latches that would leave the pilot in the back seat hanging
on to the yoke after lift off. I did not see any comments on my "Bass
Akwards" article. With such a knowledgeable group, I was expecting
something. http://www.eaa.org/experimenter/articles/2010-11_bass.asp
There is a link to a side splitting segment from Top Gear.
-- Murry

That was another one.
I had to modify my 182 for that one.

Paul Lamar

"The trike arrangement with the single front wheel leads to terminal
oversteer, a spinout, when pushed to the limit."

Not necessarily true. Under steer over steer has nothing to do with where
the wheels are and how many. I don't think he knows what he is talking
about using these terms in this context. Slip angles vary with load
and tire construction. The coefficient of friction of a tire also varies
with load. Higher load lower coefficient of friction. Therefor side
force generated can vary widely. The major effect is the CG being behind
the center of side force. If what he says is true fully locking tails
wheels would
be more popular. Has anybody on here flown a fully locking tail wheel?

Paul Lamar


Less than 40mph stall speed and you need flaps ? Virg

Have you ever hit a pickup truck on the runway at 40 MPH? :)

The flaps keep the nose down at slow speeds so one can see.

Paul Lamar


Paul,
The Yak has a fully locking tailwheel. It only swivels when you hold the
stick full forward for taxi. When you are lined up on the runway and let the
stick back to center, the tailwheel locks in the strait position. When the
hp is high in a small plane, it really helps with takeoff roll.
And I totally agree with your training assessment on the Cub. I learned in a
172 and spent time in a Cub. Learn to fly first, then the Cub can be a lot
of fun (also teaches you how much rudder a poorly designed aircraft really
needs.......).
Larry