Trike landing gear

[Larry Renger]

Sadly, I can’t seem to get them right.🤢

Should the nose gear be shorter than the mains? What about main gear position r/e cg position? How about stiffness?

So many variables! I see trike gear models land perfectly every time and mine play easter bunny hop. What is the secret?

[Ken Culbertson]

Sadly, I can’t seem to get them right.🤢

Should the nose gear be shorter than the mains? What about main gear position r/e cg position? How about stiffness?

So many variables! I see trike gear models land perfectly every time and mine play easter bunny hop. What is the secret?

The secret is properly placed wheels relative to the CG, stiffness of the struts and the CG itself.  A properly trimmed ship does not bounce no matter how many wheels it has.  I used to use trike gear and had just as many landing issues as I did before I learned how to land on 2.

Unless you just love trike gear I would learn how to land on 2 but that is just me.  Just out of curiosity, do you practice landing as if it were finals at the Nats on every flight?  Pretty soon it becomes nearly automatic.

Ken

It just dawned on me that I did not answer any of your questions!  So here goes based solely on my own experience.  When I used trike gear I set them up to all be the same height.  The problem is not the landing, it is the takeoff.  To Short and it will want to stay on the ground too long and too long you can't keep it on the ground long enough.  Landing is easier with the short nose since you can keep it down easier once it lands. Trikes will bounce just like a 2 wheeler if you land them wrong and they are severely prone to take off on their own if they hit a bump in the pavement.  You need to land them faster and stay off of the controls as much as possible.  As the plane slows the elevator will lose effectiveness before the wing and when it hits a certain point the flaps will be in control.  Giving it down control before it is nearly stopped can actually lift the nose, especially if your wheels are close to the CG and you are into the wind.  If you are using IC make sure to measure the CG with an empty tank and place the main wheels behind it, somewhere around an inch. This is how it will land WITHOUT power and you don't want the plane settling on it's tail.  Where the CG is on takeoff is less important.

Good luck

[John A Miller]

Hi Larry, Long time huh?

Trikes are usually easy to set up.  For me, I set up the mains first. It doesn't necessarily require that the mains should be using heavier construction than the nosegear, unless you use ridiculously thin wire on the nose.

I set the mains no more than one inch behind the CG, most often, it's 5/8". I like the plane to sit very lightly on its tail, without a tank of fuel. The nose wheel is set up so the plane is at 0-0 attitude at take off.

You can use a very slight amount of down, if you must, when taking off.

A smooth take off happens when you let the plane stay on its wheels for a quarter lap, then the slightest bit of up and it smoothly leaves the ground. Maintain a slow climb that will reach your pattern level flight as you pass over the take off spot.

Landings happen one of two ways. You can keep feeding in up elevator as you slow down and land mains first, with a nose high attitude, or control  the glide with close to neutral elevator,until you feed in a small amount of up and flare slightly as your mains touch, just before your nose gear touches.

Larry, I know you probably know most of what I've written. I made use of my opportunity here to fill out the secrets, if you will, of raising your take off and level flight score.

John Miller

PS:  I just read Ken's post above. He's correct that learning the skill of using 2 wheels correctly.

The main item is to correctly set up the gear geometry. When you maintain the correct angle in relationship to the CG, and the point of wheel contact,

The angle that works best is between a maximum of 18 degrees, to a minimum of 14 degrees. 

The technique as I use it, is to fly the plane in a slow approach, with a very slight flare as your mains touch down. Quickly neutralize your controls , and your plane should stick the landing, rolling out on the mains. A neat method is to try and end the landing roll, setting the tail down right before reaching the judges.

John

[Curare]

Bunny hops on landing are usually caused by touching down with too much airspeed. If you drive the model onto the deck as opposed to flaring out, it'll bounce slightly on the nosewheel, but will change the AoA enough to lift the model off the ground, then stall and drop the nose, bounce and the whole cycle will continue until all of the energy is expended, either through bounces or one good DORK and the plane is broken.

Try flaring a bit longer on touchdown, and settling the mains first, then let the nose gently lower. It should stick and not bounce if you get it right.

[Paul Walker]

The nose should be slightly down. This allows good takeoffs and landings at speed. At speed, the nose will be at most level, thus the front wheel won't touch first. Nose first is what makes for bunny rabbit hops.

[Dave Hull]

Then there is what I call "plop-age".  You bleed airspeed, and bleed some more, forcing you to ever higher AOA. And you keep assuming you have more airspeed to bleed--until you don't. Usually the plane is no more than 6" to 12" off the deck, but now it stalls, plops on and bounces fore and aft. Terry was having this issue recently with his fine-flying Pathfindier (the French version) until our Chief Of Nag (CON) got on him about it. Once called out on it, discussed and visualized, he has been doing much better. No changes to the plane at all. So my opinion is to set a nearly neutral stance and fly it on with some speed.* That allows you to control the actual vertical speed at contact, which is the single most important part of no-bounce piloting. Unless of course it is a Ringmaster in which case you should throw bones and offer the stunt gods voodoo gifts before each flight....

Our club gets into bad landing habits because we heckle anyone who makes us walk all the way around the circle to retrieve their plane. We shouldn't do that. If we cause people to concentrate more on getting it back to the pit area, maybe we neglect setting it down smoothly at speed and letting it roll.

There was an earlier thread about the hows and whys of wheel locations for a nose dragger. You might find that interesting too, since you are inherently a design-it type guy. I believe the actual thread was about tricycle gear for a flying wing airplane, so there was less rule of thumb dragged into the discussion and more numbers and specific examples, if I recall correctly.

Stay warm, my friend

The Divot


*--Full scale pilots will discuss all day long the merit of "full-stall landings" versus "wheel landings" for each different kind of plane. I'd say that anything we're flying as control line models is likely to do much better with wheel landings. Unless in Old Time, you get extra fidelity points for Plop, Plop, Crow Hop.

**--I pogo'd a Piper Archer once pretty good when the tower reversed the pattern on me and had me landing with a tailwind. Just like Paul said, you touch that nosewheel first and you are going to have to catch the oscillations just right to get it back--or simply go around. I could practically hear the whole tower crew laughing at me as I totally balked the whole thing....

[Trostle]

Hi Larry,

Years ago, Bill Netzeband published a series of articles on all about CL stunt.  Much of what he published then still holds today, like the position of the LG relative to the CG.  For a trike gear, he showed the axles of the main wheels to be 15^o behind the CG.  He also showed a -2^o ground angle with using shorter nose gear.  I have always felt that most anything that Netzeband wrote worked.

Others have written over the years that with a trike gear, they like the main wheels to be just far enough behind the CG that the nose gear will stay on the ground (without fuel).  This means that the main gear would probably be like 10^o or even less behind the CG.  The 10^o rearward position has also been suggested by various writers.

Keith

[Larry Renger]

Thanks for the good input, guys! 

[Tim Wescott]

Our club gets into bad landing habits because we heckle anyone who makes us walk all the way around the circle to retrieve their plane. We shouldn't do that. If we cause people to concentrate more on getting it back to the pit area, maybe we neglect setting it down smoothly at speed and letting it roll.

If you really aggressively whip the model, starting from before the engine cuts, you can extend the landing some.

And -- you can whip a model that's landed, if it's going fast.  Land hot, and you can extend the rollout.

As an added bonus, you can anti-whip to make it stop faster.  Instead of getting ahead of the model and pulling, get behind the model and pull.  It's the same physics, just to a different end.

[Tim Wescott]

With my one trike gear plane, I found that coming in hot and level would prevent the first bounce; giving lots of down once the wheels are touching prevents the rest (unless you do it before you actually touch the ground -- then you just make a really ugly landing).

I have it set up the way Paul recommends: its normal stance is oh-so-slightly nose down.

[john e. holliday]

I love reading all this stuff from the pros to the beginners.  In my experience each and every plane has a happy spot.  I have landed an All American Sr. on pavement with out a bounce by using Team Race method but got scored low because I was told it was too fast.  My latest is the B-25 by Don Hutcheson that only been flown on grass so far.  Takes offs are effortless as well as the landings.  Even 2 wheel gear planes each one is different.  Oh by the way my Ringmaster Twin is another tri geared plane that takes off and lands great on grass.  Have no paved surfaces to fly from unless I drive to Wichita, St Louis or even Tulsa. But all planes take trimming and practice.

[Ken Culbertson]

I love reading all this stuff from the pros to the beginners.  In my experience each and every plane has a happy spot.  I have landed an All American Sr. on pavement with out a bounce by using Team Race method but got scored low because I was told it was too fast.  My latest is the B-25 by Don Hutcheson that only been flown on grass so far.  Takes offs are effortless as well as the landings.  Even 2 wheel gear planes each one is different.  Oh by the way my Ringmaster Twin is another tri geared plane that takes off and lands great on grass.  Have no paved surfaces to fly from unless I drive to Wichita, St Louis or even Tulsa. But all planes take trimming and practice.

My experience with trikes on grass is very good.  I think you have a much better chance of surviving bumps but I still don't like them in the air.  One more thing sticking out to mess up trim.  Congratulations on getting a no bounce landing out of an AASenior.  I have heard stories that it was possible but after about 1,000 flights on mine when I was a kid I passed them off as rumors.

[Trostle]

 I have landed an All American Sr. on pavement with out a bounce by using Team Race method but got scored low because I was told it was too fast.

Not trying to hijack this thread, but there is nothing in the rules, OTS or AMA, that provide any basis to downgrade a landing because "it was too fast".  Yes, judges must make judgements and score what they see, but there is no cause to downgrade a landing because it was too fast.

This is particularly so in OTS where the OTS rule on landing is that points are deducted only for the number of times it bounces after touching down or a nose over.  There is nothing in the OTS rule about the approach or its speed.

Keith

[FLOYD CARTER]

I can't think of a good reason why the nose gear should be shorter.  I did hundreds of landings on my Cessna 172, without any bounce.  It sat perfectly level on its trike gear.  The mains are far enough behind the CG that first contact forces the nose down onto the front wheel.  It would take a really poor landing to bounce if the mains were properly positioned.

[Larry Renger]

Quote from Kieth "This is particularly so in OTS where the OTS rule on landing is that points are deducted only for the number of times it bounces after touching down or a nose over.  There is nothing in the OTS rule about the approach or its speed."

Been burned by a judge who judged it "his way". Downgraded a bounce free landing because of a lumpy approach. Refused to change the score after protest. 

[Ken Culbertson]

Quote from Kieth "This is particularly so in OTS where the OTS rule on landing is that points are deducted only for the number of times it bounces after touching down or a nose over.  There is nothing in the OTS rule about the approach or its speed."

Been burned by a judge who judged it "his way". Downgraded a bounce free landing because of a lumpy approach. Refused to change the score after protest. 

I was young once and I can't remember where a "lumpy approach" ever got me a "bounce free landing".  I guess girls are different now.

[TigreST]

A snap shot of the Brodak Pathfinder plans as relates to tricycle gear location relative to the CG.  FWIW.

[Paul Smith]

Quote from Kieth "This is particularly so in OTS where the OTS rule on landing is that points are deducted only for the number of times it bounces after touching down or a nose over.  There is nothing in the OTS rule about the approach or its speed."

Been burned by a judge who judged it "his way". Downgraded a bounce free landing because of a lumpy approach. Refused to change the score after protest. 

Once awarded, a judges' score cannot be amended.  In events like Stunt and Scale, the judges' marks cannot be changed by protest.  Math errors CAN be corrected.

[Ken Culbertson]

Once awarded, a judges' score cannot be amended.  In events like Stunt and Scale, the judges' marks cannot be changed by protest.  Math errors CAN be corrected.

Now you tell me.  Would failure to record appearance points be considered a math error?  Is 55 years later too late to protest a score?  Some things you never forget!

Ken

[Tim Wescott]

A snap shot of the Brodak Pathfinder plans as relates to tricycle gear location relative to the CG.  FWIW.

• With the plane "flying level" on the plans, draw a line straight down from the CG.  Note that this means the CG placed vertically as well as fore-aft.  If it's a stunt ship, assume the CG is level with the wingtips (and make it so, if you're the designer)
• Draw a line that's 15 degrees offset from that "CG" line.  Forward for a tail-dragger, backward for a trike
• Draw a line about 1" to 1/2" below the tip of the prop (you may want to go higher -- I'm a bit "sporty" in this regard).  Call it "the ground"
• The bottom of the wheels should touch the spot where the ground line intersects the 15-degree line

Note that some variation is acceptable. 

Moving the gear more directly under the CG makes for smoother landings, at increased risk of nose-overs for tail-draggers and tail dragging for trike gears.  I wouldn't hesitate to experiment with a further-forward location for a taildragger if I always flew off of rough grass.

[Ted Fancher]

Hi Larry,

Years ago, Bill Netzeband published a series of articles on all about CL stunt.  Much of what he published then still holds today, like the position of the LG relative to the CG.  For a trike gear, he showed the axles of the main wheels to be 15^o behind the CG.  He also showed a -2^o ground angle with using shorter nose gear.  I have always felt that most anything that Netzeband wrote worked.

Others have written over the years that with a trike gear, they like the main wheels to be just far enough behind the CG that the nose gear will stay on the ground (without fuel).  This means that the main gear would probably be like 10^o or even less behind the CG.  The 10^o rearward position has also been suggested by various writers.

Keith

Haven't actually checked my copy of the Wild Bill articles for this but...

It wasn't the angle of the gear wire Wild Bill addressed but, rather, the point at which the main gear wheels (conventional or tail dragger) touched the ground relative to the CG.  If you use the "angle" of the wire gear strut the gear mount location relative to the CG could be anything as long as the touchdown point of the wheels was as prescribed: 15 degrees aft of the CG (forward if a tail dragger).  Ideally, however, (IMHO) the gear should be mounted at or near the CG as that point relative to the touchdown point of the wheels minimizes touchdown stresses that might displace the desired touchdown point of the wheels at touchdown.

Full disclosure: I've no personal experience with the trike gear variety but the 15 degrees forward of the CG (touch down point of the main gear wheels) works like a charm on a tail dragger.  Al Rabe would be the Prince of knowledge on that subject as his near scale ships made "no" attempt to "flatten" the ship's attitude at rest and his landings were routinely flawless and, by far, the biggest reason he had an audience every time he flew one of those deliciously uncommon stunters.

Ted

[John A Miller]

Now you tell me.  Would failure to record appearance points be considered a math error?  Is 55 years later too late to protest a score?  Some things you never forget!

Ken

I apologize for the possible hijack here, but I think there might be a few others who have been handicapped with wrongful actions at the hands of well meaning, but unknowing judges.

In my own case, at a Nats, I was given 10 points for a landing. I had been scoring in the mid to high 30's for landings. The reason for the low score was that on roll out, on my last qualifying flight. I hit a full scale tie down, and bounced about 4 feet into the air, landing on my nose wheel then rolling a few feet. I did not qualify to move up to the finals by 1/2 a point.

I wasn't aware of the rules pertaining to striking an object, on landing (roll out), beyond the pilots ability to avoid. I should have been judged on the approach, actual landing, and roll out to the point where the plane struck the object.

Aw-well, that was a long time ago. what  might have been, if only I knew at the time.

[Norm Furutani]

A snap shot of the Brodak Pathfinder plans as relates to tricycle gear location relative to the CG.  FWIW.

Hi Larry
Even for me, take off and landings are really smooth with the Pathfinder.

No bunny hops!

Norm Furutani

[Trostle]

Once awarded, a judges' score cannot be amended.  In events like Stunt and Scale, the judges' marks cannot be changed by protest.  Math errors CAN be corrected.

Again, not intending to hijack this thread on trike landing gear, but:

Where is it written that a "[judge's] score cannot be amended".    (Bracketed term inserted for correct usage of possessive singular term for "judge's.)  I am not familiar with any such rule in the Control Line Precision Aerobatic rules, or in the Control Line Scale rules, or the Control Line General rules, or the AMA General rules.

Or is there a secret stash of special rules that only a select few have access to?

Keith

[Ken Culbertson]

I apologize for the possible hijack here, but I think there might be a few others who have been handicapped with wrongful actions at the hands of well meaning, but unknowing judges.

In my own case, at a Nats, I was given 10 points for a landing. I had been scoring in the mid to high 30's for landings. The reason for the low score was that on roll out, on my last qualifying flight. I hit a full scale tie down, and bounced about 4 feet into the air, landing on my nose wheel then rolling a few feet. I did not qualify to move up to the finals by 1/2 a point.98

Mine was the 1964 Nats and I misses winning Senior by 12 points.  Found out later that I had been awarded 21 appearance points but the scorekeeper forgot to put it on my score sheet.  To add insult to injury I missed the 5th place trophy by 1/2 point.  On the bright side it was a life lesson to always question things if they don't look right.

Ths only way this is connected to Trike gear is the the person who thought he won was flying a Saber with trike gear and he bounced on his first round landing!

Ken

[Dave Hull]

Let’s see if I got all this advice straight:

1. Ken sez to shine on the trike gear, because anyone flying control line ort ta be practicing as if it was the Nationals and therefore has to learn how to fly conventional gear.

2. Keith sez that the proper way to score OT landings is to count the number of times the plane bounces after it flips over.

3. Tim sez that if only guys would learn all the nuances of proper whippage, that bad boy would end up rolling up on the pit area no matter how bad the landing—even if’n you got to yank the dude backwards a bit to let the horses see the barn….

4. Flying Floyd sez that a Cessnose 172 is the same as a stunt model, so the positive incidence in the wing in the normal landing stance o’ that bird ain’t a factor. So on your “everything symmetric” stunter, you don’t need any AOA to generate lift. Just the magical lightness of 4 lb stuntwood….

5. And, if I try to take both Tim’s and John’s advice together, I can land really hot, and keep whipping so’s I can hit the tie-down hardware (or other improvised obstruction at your home field, such as the pavement cracks at ours) as fast as possible, leading to the four foot re-airbornization of said plane, to achieve truly minimum landing points. And, if it happened to be a dreaded All American (as Doc mentioned) and it flipped over, I should shake the handle vigorously to be sure to get each deduction counted for the inverted bounces that Keith suggests.

6. Doc wants to stay in his happy place, which consists of endless Kansas grass. (I’m having green-envy here in the California semi-desert.)  So what Larry needs to do is either get some help pulling up his asphalt and planting grass before the rain ends here, or start flying combat with the guys out in gopher gulch—which is allegedly grass--who don’t use no dadgummed wheels and don’t care what the landing looks like so long as there’s no dirt packed into the venturi.

7. At this point I got a little confused, but believe you guys are all saying that sometimes, the judges aren’t going to fork over the big points, just on accounta because. That’s it. End of story. Even if you hide your bounces real good. And the rulebook statute of limitations—even when extended by protest—may not be more than a few minutes, and is definitely not 55 years according to Ken. So while you are landing, you need to keep your good eye on the judge by using Tim’s whippage technique to center up on the judge, and if the judge even thinks about frowning, be sure to start yelling at him before your plane stops rolling because as Paul sez, if it gets written down it’s all over. Beyond ink. More like stone tablets. That’s in the Secret Stunt Rules which every time I pin somebody down on one of them, and I write it down, it gets stolen, or lost or something. These SSRs were covered in my last Stunt Judge Training session by [name deleted, to protect the involved individual] wherein he/she emphasized there were no unwritten rules—but at that point he/she either winked, or had a bad tick in his/her eye and I’m still left wondering when I'm gonna get to see the real rules for top scores.

8. So trying to apply this to my situation, my best hope according to Ted is to build a Rabe stunter, because the awesomeness of the plane itself would be ashamed to put in a poor landing, notwithstanding what the dim bulb holding my handle does. But the part he mentions about the audience kind of makes me nervous…so I think I’ll build another Twister and move the wheels forward a little more to protect the prop from all the bouncing….

Did I get all that right, or are there some more nuances to this trike gear landing deal?

The Divot

[Curare]

Dave, maybe you just need more wheels for that perfect stunt landing?

[Dave Hull]

Greg,

That might be a good option on the proposed new Twisted, but I understand that to get the tandem gear to work on them Straight-O-Fortressess they have to all be steerable unless the wind is going right down the runway. I don't want to wait for a thermal to go thru the circle so's the wind is circumferentially aligned with our landing stripe. So, to steer 'em do I need a three-line handle for that? No way I'm putting them outrigger pogo wheels on either. First good landing they'd be punched up thru the wing. First bad landing them vert-o-pin's would be in orbit.

I'm remembering what Paul said about wheel wear:  if your wheels are all wearing out on one side, then they aren't set right (steering angle) for proper ground handling. Now, I've set down a bunch of planes for our crew and watched 'em fishtail out of my hand (even when positioned tangentially) down the runway and I figure that ain't right. So maybe to "stunt tune" my landing gear, I could have easily adjustable '52 gear and use a camera in the tailgunner's spot?

I don't know how this is gonna help Larry with his trike landings, though. My ineptitude goes well beyond the few piddly bounces that I've seen him make. Besides, he's got planes with the wing on backwards, if you can believe that--even calls one a "Fright Streak"--so how else does he expect them to land?

I think the Floyd may be onto something, though. I could add a wing incidence positioner just like the F-8 used for better landings and takeoffs. That was a trike, and couldn't have bounced too much or they would of never stuck to the boat. Best of all, then I would not need magical 4 lb stunt wood to take off with no incidence.

The Divot

[Bob Hunt]

I've had several trike gear ships over the years. Early examples were my Avanti (No, not the Bob Baron Avanti; mine came much earlier than Bob's...) and the F-105 Thunderchief. Two more recent trike gear ships were the Crossfire Extreme XLTC (Extra Long Tricycle), and my Second Wind twin. All of these models exhibited extremely good takeoff and landing qualities. All of them adhered to the rules generally outlined above: They sat nearly level on the gear, but with a slight nose down attitude (very slight...), and the main gear was located just aft of the center of gravity. On the Thunderchief the mains were a bit more aft, but not enough to hurt the performance. If the mains are too far aft, you will have to force the model to lift off with pronounced "up" control, and the result will be an an abrupt jump off the ground. Keep the mains near the CG and you will be able to make the model lift off very smoothly.

One thing I noted with all my trike gear ships was the large number of 40 point takeoff and landings I received in competition. With trike gear you don't have to worry much about the model tipping over during high wind takeoffs and chipping the prop. And nothing looks cooler than touching down on the mains and then slowly lowering the nose gear to touch the ground.

The best advice I can give is, "Try it, you'll like it!"

 I'll post a few photos with this response and a few more in a separate reply due to file size.

Bob Hunt

[Bob Hunt]

Here are a couple more photos of my trike gear ships.
Bob Hunt

[Bob Hunt]

And here are a couple of photos of the Second Wind twin with trike retracts.

Later - Bob

[Bob Hunt]

Couldn't resist adding this photo of the XLTC on takeoff in the Top-5 flyoff at the 2012 Nats.

Bob

[Bob Hunt]

I just thought of one thing you should be aware of if you are flying an electric trike gear ship. Without the battery on board the model will not sit on the gear. The tail will drop and hit the ground. You will need to make a holder for the model to avoid scratching the rear end of the model. I made up a holder from foam. Photo attached...

Bob

 

[Bob Hunt]

Here's just one more photo of the trike gear Crossfire Extreme XLTC.

Later - Bob

[Avaiojet]

Sadly, I can’t seem to get them right.🤢

Should the nose gear be shorter than the mains? What about main gear position r/e cg position? How about stiffness?

So many variables! I see trike gear models land perfectly every time and mine play easter bunny hop. What is the secret?

This experimental stunt model, the nose gear is shorter than the mains deliberately. I have no knowledge of model aerodynamics, so I did it for appearance and with hopes of keeping the model on the tarmac for that first exciting flight.

Besides, with many models the main gear is generally removable and could be altered or changed if necessary. My nose gear cannot be removed but offers some adjustment. The main gears are removable.

[pat king]

A stock P 38 sits with about a 4 degree angle of attack on the runway. A stock F-15A (RF-61C) Reporter sits at about 1 1/4 degree angle of attack on the runway. For scale work the airplane needs to sit at the proper angle on the ramp, and the landings should be smooth.

Pat

[Avaiojet]

A stock P 38 sits with about a 4 degree angle of attack on the runway. A stock F-15A (RF-61C) Reporter sits at about 1 1/4 degree angle of attack on the runway. For scale work the airplane needs to sit at the proper angle on the ramp, and the landings should be smooth.

Pat

I believe the B-17 sat at exactly the same angle it climbed out at. Not sure if I read this or was told this? Is it true?

[john e. holliday]

You need to watch videos of the war planes taking off and landing.   If you watch the B-52 it is one plane that never rotates for take off ass the wings are at a positive attitude.  It is only when it gets some altitude that nose may be pulled up for climb out and landings most of the time are not nose down.  The B-17 had to come up on the mains like most tail draggers and land on the mains.  Watch the videos of the fighter jets as they get enough speed to break ground and can rotate as the landing gear is retracted.   I have seen the Blue Angel and also the Thunderbirds retract gear and maintain altitude be fore raising nose of the planes.  I like watching the old videos and would guess most landing accidents were because pilots were worn out from long flights or damage aircraft.

In fact I think we have a member on this forum that flew the B-52's and also I think B-47's took off and landed the same way.

[Tim Wescott]

Ideally, however, (IMHO) the gear should be mounted at or near the CG as that point relative to the touchdown point of the wheels minimizes touchdown stresses that might displace the desired touchdown point of the wheels at touchdown.

As a bonus, if you put the mount point at the CG, if you change your mind about having a nose gear you can just flip the mains side-side and almost be done with the conversion to taildragger.

[phil c]

Again, not intending to hijack this thread on trike landing gear, but:

Where is it written that a "[judge's] score cannot be amended".    (Bracketed term inserted for correct usage of possessive singular term for "judge's.)  I am not familiar with any such rule in the Control Line Precision Aerobatic rules, or in the Control Line Scale rules, or the Control Line General rules, or the AMA General rules.

Or is there a secret stash of special rules that only a select few have access to?

Keith

I would think if you approached the CD\ED and pointed out the judge said the deduction was for something that was not in the rules the score could/should be changed.  Judges are supposed to follow the rules too!.

[phil c]

Another part of a smooth landing for any type of gear is:  Just as the plane's wheels touch the ground step out toward the plane to let it roll without tension on the lines.  The gear is only rarely adjusted to will track the flight circle, so if you keep walking a circular path the plane will be pulled sideways and often take a hop or two.

[john e. holliday]

That works great on a nice smooth paved area.  But, every time I do that on grass the lines snag.

[Ken Culbertson]

Another part of a smooth landing for any type of gear is:  Just as the plane's wheels touch the ground step out toward the plane to let it roll without tension on the lines.  The gear is only rarely adjusted to will track the flight circle, so if you keep walking a circular path the plane will be pulled sideways and often take a hop or two.

That wouldn't work for me.  I trim my wheels to roll on a circle to get the longest roll out as possible but all of my planes, except the ARF Nobler I have want to "fly" until they are almost stopped.  If I were to lessen tension on the lines during roll out I risk them taking off again.  also, our circles were recently resurfaced and letting your lines touch while the plane is moving is asking for a ground loop and another kink.

Ken