P-40 gear collapse incident?

[Glenn Wegman]

Thanks John-Curtis!

I've always felt Pitts time (proper power off 3-point, not wheel landings) should be a requirement to break one of the habbit of wanting or needing to see over the nose. (Or see the runway for that matter!) Stearman time is good for that too but it happens at a faster speed in a Pitts for fighter transition.

Glenn

I believe the back seat of a T-6 accomplished the same thing. The Air Corp did it right.

Steve G

Good point.

Should have stated "T-6 is a requirement and Pitts should be a requirement". Pitts requires more finness and quicker reflexes on touchdown as it does not have the soft gear of a T-6.

Glenn

[Bill Greenwood]

I have never even ridden in a Pitts, I have sort of been saving it for the right time and right pilot.
I did get my T-6 checkout all those years ago and STARTED IN THE REAR SEAT. I am not sure it was luck or a stroke of inspiration, but I insisted and John Hess agreed. By the time I soloed the next morning, I could land 3 point from the rear seat with no flaps and the view is about like a submarine.
One thing I have noticed is when I fly the Spitfire I try to be very careful to line up straight with the runway on short final befor I flare and lose sight of it. I have noticed in the Bonanza it is sometimes easy ot be complacent and come in a little curved, knowing you can see down the runway and correct at any point.
For anyone transitoning into tailwheels, especially fighters, PLEASE, for everyones sake, get some "blind time" such as a Pitts or rear of a T-6. Just front seat time in a Champ or such is not the same. ADecathlon or such gives you the ''steering" part, that is keeping the nsoe stright on the runway, but not the blind part to judge the flare or when to steer.

Last edited by Bill Greenwood on Sun Jul 20, 2008 10:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

[Obergrafeter]

My first time in a T-6 was with John Hess also, although I did have the front seat. You couldn't pick anybody better to learn from.

[jaybird]

Bill - of course, there are alot of good Pitts instructors if you want to spend some time experiencing the phenomena that Glenn refers to, and I can certainly recommend Budd Davisson's instruction in Scottsdale. I also realize that not 1 size fits all when it comes to styles, skills, etc, but as advertised, he does an awesome job in the Pitts.

[bipe215]

Thanks John-Curtis!

I've always felt Pitts time (proper power off 3-point, not wheel landings) should be a requirement to break one of the habbit of wanting or needing to see over the nose. (Or see the runway for that matter!) Stearman time is good for that too but it happens at a faster speed in a Pitts for fighter transition.

Glenn

I believe the back seat of a T-6 accomplished the same thing. The Air Corp did it right.

Steve G

Good point.

Should have stated "T-6 is a requirement and Pitts should be a requirement". Pitts requires more finness and quicker reflexes on touchdown as it does not have the soft gear of a T-6.

Glenn

I first flew a single seat Pitts about twenty years ago and found it's like every other taildragger: touch down straight and half the battle is won.
This discussion brings up a good question: would it be easier for a T-6 pilot to climb into a one hole Pitts and land it, or the other way around.

Steve G

[Glenn Wegman]

I first flew a single seat Pitts about twenty years ago and found it's like every other taildragger: touch down straight and half the battle is won.
This discussion brings up a good question: would it be easier for a T-6 pilot to climb into a one hole Pitts and land it, or the other way around.

Steve G

Interesting question!

I suggest both due to them being on opposite ends of the spectrum. The T-6 can be sluggish and can be slow to react on the runway, is just a big wind tee, and wants a timely authorative stomp on the rudder to get things back in order if you let it get out of order. It also has mass and inertia so if you don't get it corrected immediately, you may not. The Pitts on the other hand is light and quick and just needs quick short inputs with your toes on the rudder pedals to keep it in line as it has lots of control at low speed. The issue is not so much with directional control using rudder as it is with elevator. The Pitts has ttwo modes when being 3-pointed, land and fly. If you are not precise at touchdown, you will find yourself right back in the air again. It teaches you patience and precision as when everything is just right it just squeaks on and sticks.

My first Pitts landing was in an S-2B. I'm 6'5 so I've never flown an S-1 series. Strangely enough I exchanged a T-6 flight for the Pitts flight. I was out putting around in an F-6 and someone came up in a Pitts and we flew around for a couple of minutes. I went back and landed and before long a girl came up and asked if I was flying it and introduced herself as the Pitts pilot. We went over to see her Pitts and she said "I bet you could not land this airplane". I had never flown little airplanes as I learned to fly and soloed in a T-6 so I had no idea what little airplanes were like, but I said "the bets on". I hopped in the front and said "you do one first and then I'll give it a try". My eyes were pretty big after her landing and then flying it a little and finding out how light that thing was on the controls, but much to her surprise, (and mine) I made a pretty decent landing on pavement. Her turn in a the T-6 was on grass and yielded a perfect 3-point. She said it seemed like slow motion compared to the Pitts. She had learned in a Decathalon and then bough a Pitts. I sold the T-6 right after that, but flew the Pitts quite regularly. This was 16 years ago. I've always said if I ever buy another airplane it would be a S-2 Pitts.

Glenn

[mlenoch]

Did you get her name?
VL

[bipe215]

Glenn,

I'm also 6'5" and I can fit into an S-1S/C. Its snug but not uncomfortable.
I found that the S-2B was heavy on the rudders compared to an S-1.
The whole key to a Pitts is to have one that is built straight. I would hate to wrestle one that doesn't track right. The same is probably true of all taildraggers. Most of the warbirds/antiques have been groundlooped at least once and may not have been built back straight.
You said your next plane would be an S-2. If I could afford it, I'd have a Model 12. Something about a Pitts and a round engine...

Steve G