Brakes in tailwheel aircraft

[Big Pistons Forever]

I just got a call from an instructor buddy who has been asked to train a guy to fly a PA22/20. He is an experienced instructor and a suitably experienced tailwheel pilot but has never done a tailwheel conversion, so he was looking for advice on how to structure the lessons.

The rub is the airplane does not have brakes on the right side. My personal rule is that I won't do flight training in an aircraft where I don't have access to all the important controls, full stop. His thought was to start the student with him on the left side so that he had the brakes and have the student fly from the right and then at some point switch over.

Personally I am not in favour of that as lower time pilots will be initially confused by different sight picture you get from the right seat and you still wind up with having to finish with the student in the left and you with no brakes.

I am curious what others think about this issue.

[ahramin]

Depends on the student I guess. In most cases I would consider dual brakes a necessity but if the student is already capable of keeping an aircraft straight then your buddy's idea makes sense to me.

How hard would it be to install dual brakes? I had a student who bought a Beech Baron with a throw over yoke and on an early flight I mentioned that you could install a dual yoke. A week later I show up and the yoke was installed.

[Strega]

Big pistons,

I have flown several tailwheel planes that have "brakes" but they really dont do squat...


If you let your student screw up soo bad that you need brakes to fix it, I would question your ability as an instructor.

My 0.02.

(FYI I fly some of the most challenging Tailwheel AC on a regular basis- I do know what I am talking about)

[SeanMountainous]

I think that was only worth $0.01

[PilotDAR]

I agree with Strega, the brakes should not be needed if the conditions for the training are chosen by the instructor as to not demand extreme directional control. Grass runway if possible. I avoid the use of brakes to the greatest extend possible.

Toward this end, I have found it very useful when training in taildraggers, to seek out the most narrow looking runways available. The sight picture of a narrow runway will cause the student to realize they must keep it straight, or they are simply off the runway (which they instinctively should prevent). Wide runways lull an unwary student into thinking it's okay to be over here... then over there... and so forth - because there is runway there. So they will not apply the decisive directional control to keep it straight.

I was intimidated by crosswinds in my taildragger. One windy winter day, I flew circuits on the bare ice lake near home. I progressively landed more and more off the 20 knots wind, until I found I could land direct crosswind no problem. But when I slowed to less than around 20 MPH, it weathercocked totally, as the rudder stopped being effective, and the tailwheel steering had no effect on the ice. No harm done, good lesson learned.

One little gotcha was that one day I landed on a wide paved runway in quite a crosswind, I must have had full rudder in and held as the tailwheel touched, as it unlocked, and I would not have noticed, as the rudder was steering fine. As I slowed, I had no tailwheel steering, as I had not thought to center the rudder o re lock the tailwheel steering. A gentle, harmless, and embarrassing slow groundloop.... Now I know to center the rudder for a moment before slowing much after touching the tailwheel down.

My second flight ever in the Aztec was left seat with six people, at night. YUL to YYZ. It ended up being rather bad icing too. My mentor in the right seat commented that he hoped I could land it, as he could not change seats with me, had no deiced windshield on his side, and no brakes! I assured him, and it worked out just fine....

[cgzro]

Personally I would not want to teach without brakes. Differential brake is a very effective directional control mechanism and you need to see how the other pilot reacts to directional challanges. I dont think Im quite good enough yet to recover from any situation without having brakes available.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I am pretty sure that I never touched my brakes on the last tailwheel checkout I did. I guess my thinking was influenced by an event when I was teaching a guys PPL on his C 120. A brake locked on the roll out. By standing on the opposite brake I was able to stop the ground loop although it was a close run thing. Without my braking we would have gone around for sure, and at a speed that would have bent things.

I also know of a damaging ground loop in another C 120. The student lost control when a tailwheel spring broke. There were no brakes on the right side and the instructor felt he probably could have saved it with brake

I guess it is like most things in instructing, an instructor had to decide how he or she is going to manage the perceived risks. I have decided where my risk tolerance is, but am by no means suggesting that instructors who are comfortable with no brakes are doing it wrong

Strega. Thanks for your "contribution" to this thread. You tired of hanging out with your buddies on haters,flamers & trolls R us already ?

[Strega]

Strega. Thanks for your "contribution" to this thread. You tired of hanging out with your buddies on haters,flamers & trolls R us already ?

youre welcome..

no... I have an issue with my login on the "haters,flamers & trolls R us" forum...

I have a question for you BP.. If having brakes on the right side is soooo important... why were these (not to mention many other small GA planes that have been used for training for decades) certified with brakes on only one side?

Perhaps you have, or have not flown a cub, or champ, or chief, or any other plane with mechanical brakes,, but even if you did have them on both sides, the only thing these crummy brakes do is stop the airplane from rolling away when you park it... not sure how this helps when you get sideways..

[trampbike]

I have a question for you BP.. If having brakes on the right side is soooo important... why were these (not to mention many other small GA planes that have been used for training for decades) certified with brakes on only one side?

It's not because it was certified that it means it's ideal for teaching...
It's not because people were teaching on that before that it means it's perfectly fine to do it.

They were crossing the Andes without supp oxygen or pressurization in the 30's, does that mean it's still fine by today's standards?

Why do you have to be always so useless?

Oli

[Strega]

Why do you have to be always so useless?

Are you in the split s to recover from inverted flight club as well?



Guys,, Training on a tailwheel aircraft without dual brakes is perfectly fine.... people have been doing so for decades.

If you as an instructor are incapable of accepting the risk of "not having brakes"... perhaps you should rethink instructing (in my humble opinion)


Strega

[North Shore]

Gentlemen, civility, please...

[Beefitarian]

Oh my dog! If you d0n't feel comfortable teaching without brakes on your side don't do it. If you think you can or it's better to teach without brakes on your side do that.

Holy macaroni. Why is there always some reason to argue? "Your friend can't fly upside down? Maybe he should not be in our cool club house. Me me meme me."

It's like cowboys in grade 7 around here.

Mmmmmm macaroni.

[l_reason]

I do tailwheel checkouts in my Luscombe, it only has brakes on the left so that's where I'm sitting. The Luscombe is known to be a bit twitchy on the ground because is has a great deal of rudder authority. New guys have a tendency to over control and at 10mph it will swing around on you and there's not much you can do other the a little touch of brake (or a serious blast of power and opposite rudder) to stop the yaw rotation. The cable operated drums you push with your heal can be a bit difficult to get a handle on.

I'll tell the student before they come out to see me that they will be flying from the right seat due to the brakes. Besides the next plane they fly may well be a Citabria, Cub, or Pawnee they all have the throttle in the left hand and stick in the right.

I fly off of a 50'x2100' grass runway with crops on both sides. I'm keeping the brakes for myself as an insurance my policy, so I don't need to use my insurance policy.

[cgzro]

I fly off of a 50'x2100' grass runway with crops on both sides. I'm keeping the brakes for myself as an insurance my policy, so I don't need to use my insurance policy.

Spoken with the wisdom of an actual tail dragger pilot and owner. +1.

[lownslow]

If you as an instructor are incapable of accepting the risk of "not having brakes"... perhaps you should rethink instructing (in my humble opinion)

Every pilot mitigates risk to a level they're comfortable with. For now I'm on team "Brakes optional" because I have a decent amount of time with no brakes at all. The day may come where I have an experience that puts me on the other team. I take what I know about the risks and use it to make decisions that I believe will prevent incidents. You probably do the same.

Edited to not start an argument.

[Shiny Side Up]

Every pilot mitigates risk to a level they're comfortable with. For now I'm on team "Brakes optional" because I have a decent amount of time with no brakes at all. The day may come where I have an experience that puts me on the other team. I take what I know about the risks and use it to make decisions that I believe will prevent incidents. You probably do the same.

Edited to not start an argument.

+1

I found a lot also depends on your student that you're taking on too. Students can do a lot of unexpected things. I'm not a fan of not having my own brakes but it really depends on what we're doing with tailwheel training, and as above who it's with.

Not everyone is born with several thousand hours in their log book, but there's only one way to get experience. Start where you're comfortable.

[Shiny Side Up]

Further thought... it's different having crappy brakes - which you and the student have the same amount of control over - and the student having lots of brakes, and you having none. One should note that i've only encountered one instance outside of home builts like this, and that's the short wing pipers (pacers and returned to tailwheel tri-pacers and colts) unlike the crappy brake airplanes, things with not much more braking power than a bicycle (Champs and Chiefs) the Pipers have a few more horsies, and have some undesirable traits as trainers. Not impossible to use, but i'm not fond of it, especially for ab initio. The pacer is somewhat less forgiving than the champ (though by no means worthy of the "fire breathing" exclamation).

Similar' but less daunting is the cherokees with hand brakes, retrofitted with pilot side toe brakes. How do you demo as an instructor if you physically can't access stuff they can? Not ideal when you think about it from a primacy standpoint.

And that's part of the deal. Who's the student matters when considering this issue, and what the training goal is. Very few trainers were made with NO brakes for the instructor. If any. And if you're purposefully instructing with something you know has broken brakes, we'll that's just stupid, almost criminally so.

Anyone who says the student doesn't matter just hasn't done enough ab initio.

[Old Dog Flying]

I've trained dozens of people on the Fleet Canuck, Cub, Champ etc, all with poor brakes or brakes on the left only and it has never been a problem. In the Canuck, student right seat for first few flights after plenty of taxi practice then into the left seat for more taxi practice with brakes. If it was a conversion to the Canuck he/she started left seat.

In the 1950s with flying clubs operating a great many Canucks, there were problems operating these a/c with brakes on the left only so what is the problem today!

Barney

[praveen4143]

I think we should stop arguing and agree that the instructor is PIC and if he/she ain't comfortable flying with or without brakes then he/she decides not to go.. One thing we should all know real well in aviation is that a macho attitude will only take you as far as the scene of your next mishap! 'Nuff Said!

[New_PIC]

I can only offer a sample size of one, but I have had a few hours of tailwheel training in a plane with brakes on the left. I sat in the right seat and, at least in my case, the whole left/right picture thing was a non-issue. YMMV.

[Shiny Side Up]

In the 1950s with flying clubs operating a great many Canucks, there were problems operating these a/c with brakes on the left only so what is the problem today!

Barney

In short it's the people. But it's too easy to just blame instructors. The thing that for some reason is forgotten is everyone is taught by someone. Cessna didn't decide to put a nosewheel on the 170 as an experiment back in the 50's, they did it as a result of market pressure.

Things were changing when you were young, today is merely the result. We have less instructors who get time on these things and are exposed to such things, but there's also steadily decreasing demand. The students are not exposed, they don't get it from the start. Less flying farmers, more flying dentists. Even in my short time in aviation i've seen shift in the market of flight training and GA in general.

For instance keeping an eye on what home builders are up to, you never see anything that would resemble the old champ or canuck, at least it's really rare.


I'm not sure why I always feel like I'm the only one looking at the overall picture of aviation and GA in particular, while so many seems like they've been with their heads in the sand and just noticing what's went on, making the assumption "we'll this is new!"

Those damn kids!

[Old Dog Flying]

I agree that much SSU but by the same token we have far too much of the "that's good enough" attitude and students are not being taught to use their feet as well as their heads (big heads). We also have the generations of coffee shop experts who like to spout off about aircraft that they have never even sat in let alone fly. This tends to breed further generation of newbies who are afraid of the fire breathing monsters that they have heard so much about..and the fear factor breeds further degeneration of drivers who won't touch a taildragger for instance.

Just ask some of the young instructors if they would train a student in the Grumman AA1x series. The last instructor that I let fly mine (with me in the right seat) damned near pranged on take-off even though the person had a very thorough briefing..

As for someone's comment about macho pilots; well there is nothing macho about this thread. It's about teaching a student to use their head, hands and feet in the appropriate manner to fly safely.

Barney

[Shiny Side Up]

we have far too much of the "that's good enough" attitude

I would modify that by just saying that "we have had far too much of the 'good enough' attitude for far too long. I just get irritated when people pretend it's something completely new. Like it has only showed up with the latest generations of pilots. It's been growing steadily since the Wright brothers.

You're right about what you've said above, but if one generation complains about the next, they've only got themselves to blame. There hasn't been a mutation in the human genome to make worse pilots and students.

[PilotDAR]

SSU and ODF have made posts which I quite appreciate. I'll have to respect the fact that the instructor is PIC, and has the right to fly in circumstances to their preference. However, I hope that instructors, with perhaps some confidence building on their own, can assure a training environment in which brakes are not vital for them.

The factors which may affect this could include getting the student used to taxiing, without their using the brakes, avoiding crosswinds and short runways for the first while, and assuring that the instructor is quick enough on the rudder to prevent needing brakes too to fix it.

My sample size is one. However in the last two days, two different taildraggers (one of which completely new to me) into six different runways (one never visited before), and no use of brakes, other than for one landing (the new short runway), just slowing before coasting to a stop.

The student should be able to manage the brakes enough to simply stop the aircraft, very early on. It's not like there are no brakes available at all. If the approach is so poor that the instructor feels brakes would be required to stop an light GA taildragger, then perhaps the student should be taught to abandon that approach, instead of relying on brakes to finish it.

Jut my opinion, and I'm not a taildragger instructor, so I defer to those who are...

[Shiny Side Up]

The only bit i'd like to point out pilotDAR is those few ab initio bits trying to teach brakes, have their own hazardous bits. Something that's different these days is a lack of "room" to let a novice go hash it out. So with no brakes for the instructor, paved places with lots of traffic, and other sorts of issues can easily result in damage unless the instructor is so overbearing that it doesn't result in a lot of student hands on which I feel is critical to them learning quick and absorbing a lot in those first few hours which are critical to the start of flight training.

This unfortunately leads to a lot of inefficiencies in the training to start. Given the general opinions against instructors, it puts them in a no-win place. The old days where schools were at grass runways and easy access to the more ideal training enviornment.

That said I agree on your previous point where rather when doing conversion training where the student should have the basics already and the challenge of precision can be added to the process. But then that also assumes that a "convert" is proficient and on their game to begin with, and in my experience, you're only going to find that out when they got hands on the stick. Then it's a little late to back out. A different sort of judgement, and certainly not easy.