Just a few thoughts on landing the Skybolt.
A few years ago, I had previously flown a half dozen factory built taildragger's over the years and thought I had a good understanding of landing tailwheeled aircraft.I was wrong.
Experimental biplanes, specifically the "Bolt", are not difficult to land, but I view them as tricky to land smoothly on pavement with consistency. In other words; they are easy to land, but not easy to land well, on pavement, all the time.
My observations.
- Limited forward visibility. This, can only be reconciled through practice and familiarity. The Skybolt comes down the slotabout 90 mphwith good over the nose visibility from the back seat.A bit daunting at first when there's a headup front. But, a rounded pattern and lookingahead andto the sidein the flare helps to gauge the height and find the ground during touchdown. At an empty weight of aprox 1200lbs and a fixed pitch IO-360 up front,85 mph over the numbers makes for a predictable flare and 3 point touchdown in my plane.
My preference is to3 point. Wheel landings are better for heavier fast taildraggers, or acwith less rudder authority. Skybolt's have lot's of rudder. Just my two cents on that.
I do notice that she lands a bit easier with low fuel and I'm solo. Probably due to the improved vis andlighter handling.
I do my best landings with aclose in100 mph downwind, 90abeam the numbers at which I retard throttle to idle, 85 over the numbers, stop descent and level out in ground effect about a foot off and she settles on in the three point attitude.
- Now, about full stall landings in my Skybolt. Due to the length of the gear, mine being theshorter bungee type, full stall landings aren't possible. I still have lot's of aft stick left at touchdown in the 3 point attitude. If I get her slower, she'll touch tail first, which, is better than mains firstwhen going for a 3 pointer. I've found that if I drop her on andthe mains touch first, I get the rodeo bronc ride (embarrassing.) And of course, there's always the gratifying tailwheel shimmy, which is usually blamed on the TW but has more to do with the pilot's technique.
I've heard from a couple pilots that they thought the Skybolt's landed hot for a plane that stalls at 55 mph. OK, maybe they seem that way compared to a C-140 or Starduster, but, probably not compared to other biplanes with symetric airfoils. I think the higher approach/landing speed is offset by therapid deceleration caused by the induced drag from two wings in the flare. It's no Pitts, but it's simply not a spam can or monoplane either.I'd guess Skybolts handle right between a Decathelon and a Pitts.
- About Skybolt stalls. Like most biplanes, the top wing stalls first, shifting the center of lift aft to the still flying lower wing. Nose drops, nice predictable handling. The Skybolt, in power off stalls, musheswithout notice into a fully controllable positive alfa descent. No buffet, no wobble, she's a peach.If one wishes a bit more exitement, one can hold a more aggressive nose high or a power on stall to get a more pronounceddeparture buffet and break. Again predictable, with little yaw and roll that is easily overcome with twig and pedals.
Admittedly, I had been away from flying a few years when I bought my Skybolt 6 years ago. And, I wasa bit intimidated by her at first. But I overcame the first date jitter's and now we're good friends. Just thought a few might like to hear my experiences and thought's about her. Sage tailwheel drivers might yawn at what I've posted, but I do so mostly for the nugget that's walking a new path. Hope this answers a few of their questions. Have fun, and keep her straight.
A few years ago, I had previously flown a half dozen factory built taildragger's over the years and thought I had a good understanding of landing tailwheeled aircraft.I was wrong.
Experimental biplanes, specifically the "Bolt", are not difficult to land, but I view them as tricky to land smoothly on pavement with consistency. In other words; they are easy to land, but not easy to land well, on pavement, all the time.
My observations.
- Limited forward visibility. This, can only be reconciled through practice and familiarity. The Skybolt comes down the slotabout 90 mphwith good over the nose visibility from the back seat.A bit daunting at first when there's a headup front. But, a rounded pattern and lookingahead andto the sidein the flare helps to gauge the height and find the ground during touchdown. At an empty weight of aprox 1200lbs and a fixed pitch IO-360 up front,85 mph over the numbers makes for a predictable flare and 3 point touchdown in my plane.
My preference is to3 point. Wheel landings are better for heavier fast taildraggers, or acwith less rudder authority. Skybolt's have lot's of rudder. Just my two cents on that.
I do notice that she lands a bit easier with low fuel and I'm solo. Probably due to the improved vis andlighter handling.
I do my best landings with aclose in100 mph downwind, 90abeam the numbers at which I retard throttle to idle, 85 over the numbers, stop descent and level out in ground effect about a foot off and she settles on in the three point attitude.
- Now, about full stall landings in my Skybolt. Due to the length of the gear, mine being theshorter bungee type, full stall landings aren't possible. I still have lot's of aft stick left at touchdown in the 3 point attitude. If I get her slower, she'll touch tail first, which, is better than mains firstwhen going for a 3 pointer. I've found that if I drop her on andthe mains touch first, I get the rodeo bronc ride (embarrassing.) And of course, there's always the gratifying tailwheel shimmy, which is usually blamed on the TW but has more to do with the pilot's technique.
I've heard from a couple pilots that they thought the Skybolt's landed hot for a plane that stalls at 55 mph. OK, maybe they seem that way compared to a C-140 or Starduster, but, probably not compared to other biplanes with symetric airfoils. I think the higher approach/landing speed is offset by therapid deceleration caused by the induced drag from two wings in the flare. It's no Pitts, but it's simply not a spam can or monoplane either.I'd guess Skybolts handle right between a Decathelon and a Pitts.
- About Skybolt stalls. Like most biplanes, the top wing stalls first, shifting the center of lift aft to the still flying lower wing. Nose drops, nice predictable handling. The Skybolt, in power off stalls, musheswithout notice into a fully controllable positive alfa descent. No buffet, no wobble, she's a peach.If one wishes a bit more exitement, one can hold a more aggressive nose high or a power on stall to get a more pronounceddeparture buffet and break. Again predictable, with little yaw and roll that is easily overcome with twig and pedals.
Admittedly, I had been away from flying a few years when I bought my Skybolt 6 years ago. And, I wasa bit intimidated by her at first. But I overcame the first date jitter's and now we're good friends. Just thought a few might like to hear my experiences and thought's about her. Sage tailwheel drivers might yawn at what I've posted, but I do so mostly for the nugget that's walking a new path. Hope this answers a few of their questions. Have fun, and keep her straight.
