P-40 gear collapse incident?

Matt Gunsch · **Posted:** Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:44 pm

Nathan wrote:

There are pegs in the wings of the P-40 that pop up to indicate if the gear is up or down.

Down

hang the expense · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:16 am

Wheel landings(on the mains) helps maintain rudder authority as long as possible.Just depends on what you like I guess.

Glenn Wegman · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:11 am

hang the expense wrote:

Wheel landings(on the mains) helps maintain rudder authority as long as possible.

It makes no difference, as you have to stop sooner or later!

You are going to lose rudder authority at some point if you plan on stopping after landing so why not just get it over with at the near end of the runway instead of the far end and quit wearing out brakes? There's a difference between flying it onto the runway and landing it.

Glenn

Chad Veich · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 8:27 am

Chuck Gardner wrote:

This is an incomplete flare and not the appropriate way to land a P-40. You slow an airplane down with a 3 point landing it, not by a wheel landing. Nothing about the P-40 requires the pilot to land this way. Just because you have seen it like this before just proves the lack of tailwheel flight training and incompetence in the warbird pilot pool. You are not supposed to be able to see straight ahead on landing in tailwheel fighters.

The P-40 that I've seen flown most often is the PoF P-40N. I'm no warbird pilot so I'll let you tell those guys they are incompetent.

Maybe this is characteristic of the N model more so than the shorter fuse P-40 variants? I remember a particularly nice giant scale model of the P-40N that did the exact same thing. Almost like a wheelbarrow going down the runway!

Jack Cook · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 8:38 am

My own personal NON expert/experienced opinion would be that for a novice in type, the wheel landing would be apppropiate way to start and has you build experience move to a 3 point or tail low 2 point. But it's not relevent to the mishap has that was a mechanical issue and just so ya'll know John wasn't flying the a/c on that particular leg.

gilt · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:43 am

hang the expense wrote:

Wheel landings(on the mains) helps maintain rudder authority as long as possible.Just depends on what you like I guess.

Actually wheel landings just make you a passenger in a very heavy, and very expensive weathervane. Three point landings will always allow you to touch down at minimum speed, and stop in the shortest distance, and with a locking or steerable tailwheel pinned to the ground with full aft stick directional control will be improved.............................that's why wheel landings were not in either the USAAF or USN WWII curriculum.

Tom-

krlang · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:42 pm

Chuck Gardner wrote:

Quote:

krlang wrote:

The landing was interesting to say the least, getting the prop really close to the ground trying to slow the airplane down.

Just about every P-40 I've ever seen fly has looked just like the above pic during the landing roll. I've often wondered what it is about the P-40 that makes the tail fly so high, and for so long, on landing. True scale radio control models of the P-40 share the exact same characteristic.

This is an incomplete flare and not the appropriate way to land a P-40. You slow an airplane down with a 3 point landing it, not by a wheel landing. Nothing about the P-40 requires the pilot to land this way. Just because you have seen it like this before just proves the lack of tailwheel flight training and incompetence in the warbird pilot pool. You are not supposed to be able to see straight ahead on landing in tailwheel fighters.

Hi Chuck,
We missed you in the Cornfield!

Forgotten Field · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:01 pm

Questions about rudder authority: What is the real loss of rudder authority during a tail low attitude on a high wing or low wing airplane? How is that authority expressed, as in, is it measured by the change of speed with which yaw occurs, or a percentage of force decrease on yaw movements?

On climb out in the L-5, I have real good authority with the rudder. When power is off, dirty, the rudder is still real effective, just a tetch bit slower on response.

Since we are here in a wind tunnel on WIX regarding this subject, what is the real, possibly approaching an aeronautical engineer level, answer to this question?

Jack Cook · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:06 pm

Quote:

Since we are here in a wind tunnel on WIX

Lota hot air flowing through that baby ins't there :shock:

gilt · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:36 pm

Forgotten Field wrote:

Questions about rudder authority: What is the real loss of rudder authority during a tail low attitude on a high wing or low wing airplane? How is that authority expressed, as in, is it measured by the change of speed with which yaw occurs, or a percentage of force decrease on yaw movements?

On climb out in the L-5, I have real good authority with the rudder. When power is off, dirty, the rudder is still real effective, just a tetch bit slower on response.

Since we are here in a wind tunnel on WIX regarding this subject, what is the real, possibly approaching an aeronautical engineer level, answer to this question?

Since control authority is reduced as speed bleeds off it is counterintutitive to hold the tail in the air and become increasingly dependant on brakes for directional control. Three point it and pin the tailwheel on the runway with full aft stick, that's what was taught during the big war, that's what is in the factory Beech 18 manual and yet manjy modern pilots thionk they know better.............aerodynamics haven't changed.

Tom-

bipe215 · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:25 pm

GilT wrote:

Forgotten Field wrote:

Questions about rudder authority: What is the real loss of rudder authority during a tail low attitude on a high wing or low wing airplane? How is that authority expressed, as in, is it measured by the change of speed with which yaw occurs, or a percentage of force decrease on yaw movements?

On climb out in the L-5, I have real good authority with the rudder. When power is off, dirty, the rudder is still real effective, just a tetch bit slower on response.

Since we are here in a wind tunnel on WIX regarding this subject, what is the real, possibly approaching an aeronautical engineer level, answer to this question?

Since control authority is reduced as speed bleeds off it is counterintutitive to hold the tail in the air and become increasingly dependant on brakes for directional control. Three point it and pin the tailwheel on the runway with full aft stick, that's what was taught during the big war, that's what is in the factory Beech 18 manual and yet manjy modern pilots thionk they know better.............aerodynamics haven't changed.

Tom-

Its not that "many modern pilots think they know better". There are situations where wheel landings make sense. I know a veteran AgCat pilot that always wheeled it on and fast taxied (tail up) so he could get reloaded as soon as possible. A lot of the B-17 guys wheel land to minimize wear and tear on the hard to find tail wheel tires. Some aircraft
have plenty of rudder authority as the tail comes down.
I have taught a lot of guys tailwheel technique and I always include taxiing the full length of the runway with the tail up. It teaches directional control very effectively. My Dad also teaches this way and he was not even aware of wheel landings when he flew in the Air Corp. My Dad, by the way, has flown since 1941 and has yet to scratch an airplane.

Steve G

FG1D Pilot · **Joined:** Fri Mar 04, 2005 10:42 am **Posts:** 450

Chuck Gardner wrote:

Quote:

This is an incomplete flare and not the appropriate way to land a P-40. You slow an airplane down with a 3 point landing it, not by a wheel landing. Nothing about the P-40 requires the pilot to land this way. Just because you have seen it like this before just proves the lack of tailwheel flight training and incompetence in the warbird pilot pool. You are not supposed to be able to see straight ahead on landing in tailwheel fighters.

Chuck, you are correct on most aircraft, however the P40's tailwheel doesn't lock. You don't 3 point a P 40. Even Charlie Bond told me he 3 pointed a P 40 " once ".

Forgotten Field · **Posted:** Sat Jul 19, 2008 9:19 am

I seem to remember some photos of P-40's being three pointed. Why can't you three point a P-40?

Saville · **Joined:** Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:45 am **Posts:** 520

What does the P-40 Pilot Operating Handbook say?

Glenn Wegman · **Posted:** Sat Jul 19, 2008 10:38 am

FG1D Pilot wrote:

Chuck, you are correct on most aircraft, however the P40's tailwheel doesn't lock. You don't 3 point a P 40.

Doesn't lock on a Spitfire either. Unless I'm mistaken, sooner or later the tail wheel has to come in contact with the ground on roll out. The transition is where people seem to skin them up as they bring the tail down too soon or too late. Either of which can result in loss of control.

Pilot handbook states:

12. CUT YOUR THROTTLE AND LAND 3-POINT. If you baloon or bounce, correct by using the throttle. If the balloons or bounces are excessive, apply necessary poewer and go around. Don't jockey the stick and throttle, because this causes you to "crow-hop" down the runway.

13. Keep the airplane rolling straight down the runway by using rudder and brakes. etc....

NOTE:
You nneed about 2000' of runway from the point of contact to the end of the roll.

Quoted from the Handbook.

Glenn

Warbird Information Exchange

P-40 gear collapse incident?

Who is online