Hold short instructions for a taildragger

[pelmet]

I remember one time in a certain taildragger doing domething foolish such as applying brake while the tail was still up on landing and the result being an immediate rising of the tail which was fortunately counter-acted by immediately releasing the brake. All just to reach a taxiway. And not only that, I knew better than to do something like that and did it anyways. Fortunately, the tail came down and there was no problem.

In this case, it appears that significant brake was applied and the aircraft nosed over. The landing distance from the threshold of 28 to the intersection is reasonable if properly flown but perhaps it is just best not to put yourself in a situation where you might need to really apply brakes on landing in a Taildragger when it can be easily avoided. "unable or unwilling to hold short, request a 360". Otherwise, a long landing may leave you with unfriendly options of......significant braking, continuing through the intersect with whatever risk that entails, or a going around which could have potential hazards due to the other traffic.

"C-FOER, a de Havilland DHC-2T MK. III aircraft operated by the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Province of Ontario, was conducting touch and go’s on Runway 28 at Timmins (Victor M. Power) (CYTS), ON. The pilot advised the FSS that they would come to a full stop prior to the intersection of Runway 03/21, in order to accommodate other traffic. During the landing roll, the aircraft nosed over momentarily, and the propeller contacted the runway several times. As the aircraft dropped back onto its tail wheel, the impact was sufficient to activate the ELT. The pilot was not injured, and requested to be towed to the ramp. The ELT was manually turned off. The operator’s maintenance reported serious damage to the propeller, engine and empennage"

[Maynard]

Interesting. I’ve landed a metro before the intersection, and watcheda jazz classic as well. Tons of room for a beaver

[pelmet]

Interesting. I’ve landed a metro before the intersection, and watcheda jazz classic as well. Tons of room for a beaver

Thanks for the info. Obviously, if properly positioned for the landing(as was your case) it is not a problem. I suspect a long landing in the incident. The good news with a Metro or classic Dash is......jumping on the brakes can be very helpful. I am sure we have all been there at some point, but in a taildragger.......Not so good, and is one less reasonable option that you have in the event of a long landing for whatever reason.

Maybe what I am suggesting is overly-conservative and one could plan on an early go-around as am alternative if things are not obviously stabilized.

But as they say....S__t happens. This was an expensive one.

[Eric Janson]

My company prohibits LAHSO operations (we operate large jets).

If I get a LAHSO clearance I will simply say "unable" and let ATC decide what they want us to do.

[pelmet]

My company prohibits LAHSO operations (we operate large jets).

If I get a LAHSO clearance I will simply say "unable" and let ATC decide what they want us to do.

I believe as a foreign flag carrier, you are not allowed to in the US. Has your company expanded that to a worldwide procedure?

[Meatservo]

The amount of reverse thrust available in a conventional turbo-beaver, especially if it's in flight idle, should preclude any kind of nose-over and make the use of brakes pretty much redundant. Why, just putting the power lever on the gate in high idle at touchdown will make the discing prop go so flat it's hard to imagine the tail staying up for more than 50 feet or so. He must have pounced on the brakes like Oprah on a baked ham. Or maybe landed with his toes on them.

Whatever: a discussion about use of brakes on a conventional-gear aircraft is worth having, but I'm surprised it was a turbo-Beaver pilot that occasioned it. That thing doesn't even need brakes, other than for swinging the tail around for that perfect parking job.

[pelmet]

The amount of reverse thrust available in a conventional turbo-beaver, especially if it's in flight idle, should preclude any kind of nose-over and make the use of brakes pretty much redundant. Why, just putting the power lever on the gate in high idle at touchdown will make the discing prop go so flat it's hard to imagine the tail staying up for more than 50 feet or so. He must have pounced on the brakes like Oprah on a baked ham. Or maybe landed with his toes on them.

Whatever: a discussion about use of brakes on a conventional-gear aircraft is worth having, but I'm surprised it was a turbo-Beaver pilot that occasioned it. That thing doesn't even need brakes, other than for swinging the tail around for that perfect parking job.

Of course it is possible that this nose-over happened for another reason than brakes. I have made an assumption that it is due to braking and it could be wrong but regardless, I still believe the general statement I made has some validity.

[PilotDAR]

The amount of reverse thrust available in a conventional turbo-beaver, especially if it's in flight idle, should preclude any kind of nose-over

I do not have experience flying Turbo Beavers, though I do have enough experience in other reverse equipped aircraft, including a different turbine taildragger, to know that if you are relying on application of up elevator to hold the tail down once on the surface, and you apply lots of reverse, the disrupted airflow over the tail will make it noticeably less effective. Though I speculate, perhaps the unfortunate Turbo Beaver pilot had enough reverse applied to overcome the elevator effect he was depending upon to overcome the braking effect.

I scared myself once applying reverse on the step in a floatplane, and having it dance around under reduced control, rather than decelerating straight and level as I intended. For that reason, the flight manual supplement I drafted for that aircraft prohibited use of reverse while on the step - 'cause you should not need it anyway!

[Old Dog Flying]

It has been a long time since I retired but if I recall, simultaneous operations on intersecting runways can only be done when there is a control tower in operation and an FSS is not a control tower.

[Eric Janson]

My company prohibits LAHSO operations (we operate large jets).

If I get a LAHSO clearance I will simply say "unable" and let ATC decide what they want us to do.

I believe as a foreign flag carrier, you are not allowed to in the US. Has your company expanded that to a worldwide procedure?

Yes - prohibited anywhere in the World.

We are not the only Airline with this policy - I think you'll find the same policy at most Airlines.

[pelmet]

My company prohibits LAHSO operations (we operate large jets).

If I get a LAHSO clearance I will simply say "unable" and let ATC decide what they want us to do.

I believe as a foreign flag carrier, you are not allowed to in the US. Has your company expanded that to a worldwide procedure?

Yes - prohibited anywhere in the World.

We are not the only Airline with this policy - I think you'll find the same policy at most Airlines.

Have only worked at two. Both have flown to many countries. Neither had this policy. Would be curious to hear from others.

[Redneck_pilot86]

When did this happen? Could he have been skidding on ice without realizing how much brake was applied, then suddenly got traction?

[linecrew]

"C-FOER, a de Havilland DHC-2T...

This was a turbine Beaver...why wouldn't the pilot have used beta to stop more aggressively?

Disclaimer: I've never flown one so just wondering.