Whether or not the wheel landing is better or safer in a crosswind is a topic
of great debate among the ranks of taildragger pilots. We should all know the
pros and cons of and be comfortable with both types of landings. We can then
each make our own informed decision as to which one we feel is better. The
bottom line is probably this: If one pilot is more comfortable with a wheel
landing, then it might be the best landing for that pilot. If another pilot is
more comfortable with the full-stall landing, then it is probably the better
landing for that pilot.
I do not believe in general that a wheel landing is better or necessary in a
crosswind. Of course, there are specific airplanes in which a wheel landing
might be better for all kinds of reasons that are beyond the current scope of
this article. One must approach each airplane differently and should consider
all options before climbing into a new or unfamiliar airplane. I just don't
like those that say, without exception, a wheel landing is mandatory, or must
be made, in a crosswind. It's simply not true. I do believe all taildragger
pilots should be able to make wheel landings and should keep that skill current
because it's good for you. I keep my wheel landing skills current, but in a
crosswind I like to make a full-stall landing in the airplanes in which I have
When I make a wheel landing in a crosswind in my Cessna 170A, the amount of
rudder work to keep the airplane on the centerline during the landing rollout
when the tail is up in the air is amazing. I think the difference is that with
the full-stall landing, the tailwheel is down on the runway from the moment of
touchdown, and held down firmly throughout the landing rollout (and taxi) with
full back yoke. The bite of that tailwheel on the runway makes all the
difference. During the landing rollout after a wheel landing, you're like a
well-oiled weather vane. The tail is free to swing around from the pressures of
the crosswind blowing against it. That's the difficulty of the crosswind right
there. It's not the angle of attack of the wings. That does not cause the
airplane to turn into the wind. If you're continuing to hold the proper aileron
correction, that upwind wing is absolutely not going to fly again. Plus the
airplane is at its stalled angle of attack in its three-point attitude, and a
stalled wing doesn't kind of start losing its lift, the lift is gone all at
once. When you stall the airplane, it doesn't just start descending a little,
it drops out from under you. If gusts on the wings are your argument for making
a wheel landing, you had better be getting that tail WAY up so the wings have a
negative angle of attack because we all (should) know that a lower angle of
attack is the way to restore lift to a wing, not visa-versa.
I think the problem might be that a lot of taildragger pilots are sloppy with
keeping the stick/yoke all the way back. I see these airplanes rolling down the
runway with the elevator flopping around all the time. This behavior would
certainly lead to a false belief that the full-stall landing is squirrellier
than a wheel landing. The goal is to get that stick/yoke all the way back at
the moment of touchdown, and then hold it there. That puts maximum downward
pressure on the tailwheel so it gets maximum traction. When I was new in my
airplane, I would notice it getting squirrelly during the landing rollout, and
I would always notice that I was relaxing the yoke. I would immediately pull it
back and the airplane instantly became stable. Folks, you must get in the habit
of holding that stick/yoke all the way back at all times from the moment of
touchdown. The airplane will not fly off again because the tailwheel is on the
ground so the angle of attack cannot increase. You want to keep that tailwheel
firmly down so it can do its job.
My dad has owned a Cessna 195 for more than 35 years. He summed it up perfectly
the other day when he was telling this guy that he always makes a full-stall
landing no matter how bad the wind is. He said sometimes he's fighting it big
time in a crosswind, but that ends at moment of touchdown. It's because he's
got that tailwheel planted down firmly with the yoke back in his gut. He also
had a Stearman for 10 years before the 195, and always made full-stall landings
in it. He learned to fly in a T-6 in the Air Force in the 1950's and said they
always made full-stall landings. He has over 5000 hours in taildraggers alone
and has never ground-looped one.
I am glad to see someone else finally arguing for the correct methods. (I am
blue in the face) Two things have not been mentioned at all. The first one is
keeping the wing DOWN into the wind. I will three point ALL taildraggers in a
cross wind. You must keep the wing down as needed to hold a centerline track.
If you cannot hold it, it is beyond the limits of the airplane. That simple.
You must hold the wing down all the way through touch down, landing tail wheel
and "wing down" wheel first then rolling gently to the last wheel as the other
wing quits flying. You never take out the wing down correction to land all
three wheels at the same time; although this may improve your ground loop
The other thing is, this exact method applies to the takeoff as well. Most
takeoffs should be made three point; especially for beginning taildragger
pilots or pilots in an unfamiliar airplane. A taildragger is normally designed
to set at a stall angle of attack, this is a natural reducer of take-off and
landing distance. To learn the visual cues for staying straight during landing
one should do three point takeoffs as well. Lift off should be made with the
same correction for cross wind as for touchdown. Some airplanes (normally
biplanes) need more speed for the ailerons to have controllable effect and you
can "nail' it on the mains until you have sufficient control and then pull it
off in a manner so not to "skip" across the runway. The transitions from tail
high to tail low or the opposite is the most critical period in either takeoff
or landing. The gentleman who likes landing tail low and then bring it up on
the mains is lucky. This is one of the dumbest and most dangerous things for
"most" pilots to try.
I disagree with the 170 guys (and others) who think wheelies give better
control. If you need such speed to control it, find another runway more into
the wind. Many of use decide we HAVE to get it on rather than go somewhere
else. Remember you can land/takeoff diagonally across wide runways and lessen
the crosswind component or find a taxi way, ramp, or piece of grass, if you can
go no where else.
For the Instructors out there. Remember two things; do not assume the student
knows anything (this will keep you alert), you were most likely taught by a
student yourself, ( most instructors do not have much experience themselves,
you can not teach what you have no experience doing!). Do not assume a 500-1000
instructor has any real experience when most of it is instruction given!
I give this advise not as a expert, but a pilot with many experiences in a
large variety of airplanes, and following is just a few; Champs, Chiefs,
Tcrafts, Monocoupes, Emeraudes, Glassair, Travel Air, most Wacos, Beech
Staggerwing, Howard DGA 15P, 727, Boeing PT17, Stearman C3R, Flybaby, J3, J4,
J5, PA 11/ 12/13/17/18/ 20/22/ 32, Vultee V1A, BAE3101, Cessna
C90,C99,D50,35,33,A36, Citabria, Stinson, 108/1/2/3/SR7/8/9/10/V77, Fairchild
24W/24R/C8C/C8E/PT 19/23/26 so on and so on. I have had a great life in many
wonderful airplanes and I like to help others enjoy it as much as I have. Part
of that is doing it correct and safe, and did I say have fun.
Remember. KEEP THE STICK BACK......
Gene lost his life in an aircraft crash on October 21, 2003...see
for more details. We lost a good one!
As promised, I think the following input is consistent with the flavor of your
commentary on the great debate. By the way, I think your article is dead on,
and I'd be honored to run you through a CFI upgrade so you can help carry on
the passing of the torch of flying real airplanes. Now some flavor for your
I'm a 3600 hour military aviator with most of my time as an instructor. 1,300
of those hours were flown in the ultimate taildragger, the U-2 Dragon Lady. I
also own a Cessna 170A and love flying the classics. Jeff you make and
excellent point that the benefit of the type of landing you chose is dependent
on the airplane and the conditions. For example, the U-2 is ALWAYS landed from
a full stall tailwheel first. With that big wing, bicycle gear, and all the
ground effect, the airplane is subject to "refly" from the smallest of gusts if
you attempt to "roll her on" with both wheels.
The risk of skipping or contacting the main wheel first is a major hazard if
attempting to "wheel borrow" or "roll her on". The result of a skip is a
dissipation of energy as the aircraft begins to re-fly in a stalled condition
(the skip absorbs the energy but not enough to keep the bird on the deck). A
stall above the ground in a high lift aircraft that is light weight can result
in a wing drop, and in the case of the "Dragon Lady", a three point landing -
not a good thing since one of the points is the titanium skid on the wingtip.
Jeff, some of the points you bring up are essential to successfully landing any
taildragger and in particularly they are applicable to the U-2. First, you
can't get into too much trouble if the longitudinal axis of your aircraft is
tracking straight with no drift and no crab (the art of stick and rudder).
Second, "tailwheel bite" is critical in the U-2, and the yoke must be moved aft
in a timely manor to transition from the touch down and flying condition of the
aircraft to the high speed taxi condition. The big thing with the U-2 is that
there is no slack whatsoever in the rigging between the rudder peddles and the
tailwheel. The bite is real! Now, I'll tell you where I differ with planes like
On cement in the 170 I prefer the wheelie. Two reasons, one my control surface
is in the air where it does some good, and it is not down in the disturbed flow
from the stalled wing/flap area at touch down. I don't consider the "bite" from
the 170 tailwheel to be something to put confidence in since it can swivel
regardless of your rudder input, should the wind decide to do her work. The
second reason I like the wheelie on cement is that it saves on tailwheel tire
wear and the constant high speed banging on the spring and rear bulkhead. On
the down side, you are right, you must learn to except the fact that you give
up your opportunity to use differential braking until the tail is down.
On the subject of being versatile as an aviator, you are once again right on
target. I prefer the full stall 3-point landing on unprepared surfaces. I
believe the prime reason we still have tailwheel airplanes coming off the
factory lines is because of the safety they offer in the bush utility type of
flying where you see them the most. The only time I can honestly say that I
really scared myself in the 170 was an attempt to do a wheelie on a turf strip
near Williamsburg VA on a windy day. The runway dropped away when my airplane
got a gust and the nose was pointed downward with the wheels off the ground. A
long pause and steady back pressure with a small addition of power saved the
day and presented a 3 point save with very little turf left. I thought I'd be
shipping out my engine and prop for an inspection and will admit that I got
very lucky and also believe that instinct took over at the right moment. So now
I always 3 point in a full stall on anything other then cement unless I really
know the condition of the turf.
Hope that adds fuel to your fire, and I do hope your readers heed the
experience that I've gained through witnessing the blood of other pilot's
errors. Great idea to start this project so we can all continue to offer ways
to improve our skills as aviators.
Major Greg Lamb, USAF
I'm pleased to have found your page. When I saw the 170 it really grabbed my
attention. I am also the proud owner of a 170a, N9547A. When I read your
comments on crosswind landings, it was like I wrote them myself. I'm sure my
credentials don't match yours, but I have arrived at the same conclusions.
I?m a CFI with about 800 TT and instruct in the Yakima Valley in Washington
state. About a year ago I was able to purchase my first tailwheel airplane. My
employer, who first taught me to fly, gave me my tailwheel check out. He's a
real pro. Before I had purchased my airplane, I had read Mr. Plourde's book
cover to cover and was convinced it was the absolute word. But the strange
thing was that when we got to the point of my training where we were talking
about how much crosswind is too much and when to switch to two point, I was
surprised when he disagreed. He said "I'll two point'em on as long as I can".
He continued, ?You may be able to two point it on, but at some point you still
have to lower the tail and that's when the rodeo starts.".
Well, I'm sure you know what's coming next. After about 60 hours t.w. time, I
finally got to test the system inadvertently. While moving my plane to a nearby
airstrip to keep from getting fogged in for a trip the next morning, I had
elected to depart just ahead of a t-storm for the short 6 mile trip. And you
guessed it when I got there the wind was blowing about 20 and was so choppy in
the pattern that I could barely keep the wings level. Well, calling on all my
composure developed from over 300 hours of flight instruction, I told myself
"you can do this just ,two point'er on. It was really amazing, even though I
was really sharp at two point landings, it was a whole different scene in this
hard of wind. Before I knew it I was recovering from the first of about three
wild prangs that I was sure was going to rip out the ponk mod. I was stunned.
This wasn't the way it was supposed to go. the second attempt was identical.
The sweat was really starting to roll. Then I remembered what Chuck had told me
and decided to three point it on. Although I had to really work to keep the
wing down at touch down, it seemed almost simple.
Though I won't claim expert status, I would like to disagree with both Plourde
and your father. I don't think wheel landings are a must do, but in some
situations and some airplanes they can be the best tool for the job. For
instance, a Maule I fly seems to run out of aileron well before the rudder
gives up, which limits it's three-point crosswind ability, but a wheel landing
(where the mains are helping the ailerons as the ship slows) can turn a
difficult landing into an easy one.
Another point about wheel landings which can, in certain aircraft, lend them an
advantage. Once the mains are down, a skilled pilot with good brakes can use
braking to assist in directional control. In some aircraft, this is more
powerful than tailwheel steering (note that with very little weight on the
mains at touchdown, there isn't much braking assist available early in the
three point roll out).
And finally there's the time I had a broken tailwheel. We noticed it shimmy
just before lifting the tail on takeoff, but didn't think much of it, but upon
landing it felt like the back of the airplane was coming off, so I went around,
did a wheelie, and kept the tail up until we were almost stopped. Then we shut
down, got out and picked up the tail and walked the airplane to a parking spot
for repairs. Try that with a nose wheel!
Great article. Congratulations on your courage in writing in contradiction to
I have been teaching tailwheel procedures for ten years, stressing that logic
dictates the use of three-point landings for most crosswind landings. The
buzz-phrase that I ingrain in tailwheel students is, "Tailwheel airplanes have
rudder steering and tailwheel steering. You'd better have one before you give
up the other.
The use of a wheel landing requires that the pilot be subjected to a moment of
vulnerability as the tail quits flying and before the tailwheel contacts the
ground. A crosswind gust at that moment could send the tailwheel pilot on an
expensive cross-country trip. For the same reason I teach that takeoffs should
normally be accomplished by leaving the tailwheel on the ground until the tail
flies itself off.
Furthermore, I teach students (tailwheel or otherwise) that any time they hear
the words "never" or "always" used in conjunction with flying technique, the
speaker should be listened to politely, then ignored and avoided. Any person
who teaches that a wheel landing should "always" be used in crosswinds has not
personally investigated the physical aspects of this situation, and is simply
parroting a worn-out myth of aviation. The opinion of such a limited intellect
is not worth consideration.
Your article is the work of a thinking pilot.
Your article is right on, and you might also add that even in a wheel landing,
the tail must eventually come down, so why use up all that runway delaying the
inevitable. Pilots that say you must wheel land in a crosswind are the same as
those that say you must get a given airplane on the "step" for optimum cruise
Want some good input? Talk to the guys at Mission Aviation Fellowship
(http://www.maf.org). I flew for them in Latin America, and the most common
landing for a Cessna 180 or 185 was what we called a tail low wheel landing.
Very often I would bump the tailwheel first, but would almost always rock up
onto the mains to kill the lift of the wing and allow better braking, as well
as prevent bounces. Approach was often with the stall warner beeping. Of
course, with a muddy soft field, we kept it threepoint.
With over two thousand hours of Beech 18 time and a present owner of a Cessna
180 when it comes to safety I cast my vote in favor of the wheel landing. In a
steady state crosswind with an aft C.G. (the most adverse condition) it will be
easier to lose control attempting a full stall landing. Leave the tail up as
long as possible for enhanced directional control (using brakes as a last ditch
measure) in a single engine airplane. A good wheel landing takes more precise
planning in the flare and I suspect it is a bit more difficult to master.
To wheel land or not in a crosswind?
It depends on the airplane and the wind speed and direction. With short coupled
aircraft, such as a Maule or Pitts, a 3 point is best. With longer aircraft,
Stearman, Cub, C-46, wheel landings are best. But more than anything else is
what feels best to you. Always go around if it doesn't feel right. A little gas
is cheaper than repairing a wing or more. But my opinion and $2.00 might buy
you coffee in New York City.
I agree with what looks like the majority here; I'll usually three-point a
crosswind landing. Where I find the wheelie most useful is in gusty conditions
when the wind is more or less down the runway. Having that little extra cushion
of flying speed all the way to the ground is really nice if the wind suddenly
drops about 10kt as you cross the threshhold -- it really sucks when your
full-stall landing unexpectedly occurs several feet up in the air!
Matthew A. Crump
It's a matter of what works for you and your airplane but... to use the three
point in a gusting crosswind you need to have an airplane that will maintain
good aileron authority at those slow speeds to react to the gusts. For the
wheel landings (which is my preferred) it needs to have good powerful brakes to
be able to use differential braking, especially at the transition to tail down.
I continue to add forward stick until you can't keep the tail up then bring it
down so that you have more control and the transition time is minimized at the
slowest possible speed. I find that the landings don't scare me as much as the
taxi after! I have used this method with Cessna 170, 180, 195, Aeronca 7AC,
11AC, Bucker, Stinson, Supercub, J5 Cub, and various others over the last 25
years and 2300hrs tailwheel.
'There's more than one way to skin a cat' - and that goes for landing
I cut my flying teeth on c180 and c185 operations in New Guinea,where we were
hot/high/humid on short/rough/wet strips.Since then I,ve done ag work,tailwheel
instructing ,and bush flying around Australia. My current bird is a c170A. Over
37 years,have done 5000 hrs on t/w.
sealed runways - always a wheeler to protect the tailwheel
over 8-10 kts x/w - usually a wheeler
firm dirt strips/short/rough - tail low wheeler
soft,suspect strips - slow 3 point
I learned a lot from the Missionary Aviation Fellowship and other mission
pilots working jungle strips - they are the men!
There's a lot in how you trim the bird insofar as not bouncing it. For
wheelers,try not trimming back too much.Leave some weight on the controls so
that it's much harder to roundout too far. This way,you only apply small back
pressure to do a reduced flare.As the mains 'kiss' , just relax the back
pressure and the aircraft will slightly rotate tail up over the wheels,which
pins it on due to reduced lift on the main wing. Try it-you should never bounce
a wheeler again. This allows you to focus on the important issues...keeping
straight and holding aileron into wind to keep the upwind wind 'down' Cheers!
I grew up on our ranch in the northwest corner of Nebraska where the wind
conditions varied constantly. I now live outside of Houston, TX. and fly my
C-170B every week. Not only does wind but temperature and surface make a
difference. Back home when I was rodeoing and really didn't know better, I used
a lot a wheel landings just to keep from tearing up my tailwheel on the ranch
and various places I really shouldn't of landed. Now, that I am older and
"wiser" and fly mainly into asphalt and concrete strips I use full stall
landings. Why? Because on a hot day on asphalt with a cross wind, lift is
generated from heat and I am a firm believer in trim, flaps and the slower the
plane becomes the more aileron is used with a good transition of the yoke to my
lap. The key for me on a cross wind landing is an 80mph approach speed with the
plane flying straight down the center line. Enough aileron and rudder to
maintain that line, PROPERLY TRIM the plane back with a nose high attitude
bleeding off the speed and maintaining more aileron as the plane slows down on
the runway. It has always worked for me but heck I am just a cowboy that rode
rank horses, what's another wild ride when you have been tossed from the best.
After reading all the comments on the 2pt vs 3pt issue I am more convinced than
ever that we aviators love an argument about flying as much as we love flying
itself. I teach tailwheel in an Aeronca 7AC and, in my opinion, there is little
difference under most circumstances between the wheelie and the 3pt. However,
for me, when the wind gets extremely squirrely, I like the extra control of a 2
pointer in getting the airplane down in the middle of the runway. However, I'll
generally use a good bit of judicious braking during the transition to
tailwheel on the ground. I think the best technique will be different for
different aircraft, depending on how effective the yawing moment created by the
rudder at the stall airspeed. Three pointer effectiveness can be increased by
pilot technique. A power on three pointer provides increased airflow over the
rudder, a more responsive elevator, generally allows for heavy braking, and can
give you some control you wouldn't normally have with the power off. The extra
landing distance is usually unimportant because of the high headwind component
and the fact that most public use runways have 5 to 10 times as much as we need
to land anyway.
For takeoffs in strong, gusty winds, I am adamant about keeping the tailwheel
pinned on the ground until there is enough airflow over the rudder to assure
directional control AND to allow the tail to be lifted enough to put the
aircraft in a slightly negative pitch attitude. Flying a tailwheel airplane off
the ground in a 3 point attitude in a gusting cross-wind is an accident waiting
Practice, practice, practice.
K. Edward Bevier
I have been flying tailwheel for all of my 27 years. Learned in a Cub and flew
everything from a Pitts to my current C170B. I like to wheel land in just about
every condition except short fields (say 1,000 ft). I find that if I "plant it"
by touching down slightly tail low (or close to level)then push
(slightly)forward on the stick, reducing the angle of attack just enough to
stop her from flying again. The control surfaces are much more effective with a
little airspeed. I have applied full stall landings in just about every
aircraft I have flown and found that in severe gusty conditions no matter how
far back in your lap the stick is the aircraft can and will start flying again.
If you do a 3 point and you are fully stalled say at 45 MPH and a 10 MPH gust
hits your aircraft, you are now in a very critical condition. High angle of
attack and full flaps, power may not be enough to save your ass. And even if
you are lucky enough to react chances are your aircraft is going to hit much
harder than you would want. I would much prefer to fly the aircraft onto the
runway. If it should start to get scary then I would have enough airspeed that
a small throttle adjustment or control surface adjustment would correct things.
The one thing I have noticed about pilots that do only full stall landings is
that they are not comfortable with using the rudder. Most want to get the
tailwheel on the ground and rely on brakes to direct where the nose points.
Just for kicks...
Have any of you tried a nice forward slip down to the runway, kicked the rudder
straight and planted the mains on equal sides of the centerline, held the stick
forward to the point where the tail landed so softly you barely felt a bump in
your seat? If not try it. It's the best feeling that a pilot could have.
Especially when the old guys at the airport tell you how they remember(before
tricycle gear)when everyone landed that way.
Ralph J. Cobert
Put me in the wheelie category for cross winds. I have most of my tailwheel
experience in a Cessna 180 with about a 100 hours in a Cessna 140 for good
Several people have pointed to the "directional stability" added by getting the
tailwheel planted on the ground as quickly as possible. If you're in a real
crosswind, however, you've got only two wheels on the ground... the tail wheel
and the main that is facing into the wind... for my money I'd rather have the
two mains on.
A problem I have with trying to do a three pointer in a stong 20 knot cross
wind is that of running out of correction at low speeds... when you get her
slowed down and the ailerons are losing their authority.... the plane is being
blown of course... this sets up the need to "lead" the touch down point....
this is almost always putting side loads on the gear...
I find that by carrying a little more speed, planting it on the mains.. I can
get the plane tracking the way I want it...and then complete the landing.
My experience with trying to three point the 180 in the gusty mountains of West
Virginia is akin to being like a blowing leaf.... you never really know where
you're going to end up....
Great discussion, folks- guess I'll add some wind of my own. I vote wheelie
when it's crosswind pucker time.
In a wheelie I can fly it on in control, with plenty of rudder, differential
brake and aileron supporting my argument. I decide when the tail comes down.
I believe that gusty crosswinds are like these heated discussions... You
somehow know when your opponent finally needs to pause for a breath. And
then,'DOINK' down goes the tail (yes keep the stick ALL THE WAY BACK AND INTO
THE WIND) and power off from "wheelie power". At that moment in time, tail
down, I am instantaneously a fervent member of the 3-point faction BUT I CHOSE
THE MOMENT. If I get short of breath (or brown shorts) before that
transfigurement - I'm GONE, climbing out in full control, and ready for another
I admit that I enjoy "3-point" (really upwind main & tailwheel) landings in
LIGHT steady crosswinds up to 10kts direct with my 7KCAB. They can be SO
sweet... But if the wind really gets nasty (like on our mountain-top paved
runway between snowbanks) I opt for speed, control, and (in case I'm all wrong
anyway) instant escape. To those who hang limp in lusty breezes, may the wind
goddess be merciful to you- but I respectfully submit that you just don't have
the kinetic energy, control authority, or throttle response to counter a REAL
Esteemed Slow Ones, if you're really sure, don't bother with tie-downs when
you're done flying- Tie the stick back: Voila! Invulnerable! If you ever
venture into REAL crosswinds, just suck stick & throttle back- how far can
that wind take you anyway (charfing through the rhubarb) I hear it's only noisy
and disorienting for a second or two. :) (just kidding y'all)
A couple points I skipped regarding strong direct crosswind wheel landings: Use
the runway direction that puts the wind on the anti-torque side (Right xwind
with right-hand engines, left xwind with left-hand single engines). This way, a
blip of power answers most gusts smartly. I'll also add the warning that once
slowed to tail-down speed, NO MAJOR THROTTLE-JOCKEYING: You are committed to
decelerating as straight as possible- DON'T cause any added lift, resulting in
a slide and/or lifting of the #@&% upwind wing. Have fun!
1 more rant & I'll shut up. Listen to the wind- you can hear the change a
millisecond before it actually moves the airplane.
While I agree, to each his own, it would be interesting to know what the
statistics could reveal about accidents during wheel landing versus 3-point.
Anyway, my C170A prefers I land her in a 3-point - the same way I learned to
land taildraggers. I would love to see some statistics.
I was taught to land 'almost any' A/C at stall (unless you are military or
airline). I have flown a few conventional-geared A/C - Pitts S-1 and S-2, Extra
230-300, Sukhoi 26, Cap 231, Piper Pacer - Cubs, Cessna 120-195,
Chipmunk....etc. I have never had a problem with either a wheelie or 3-point,
but have believed in a 'slower is better' approach. A good friend of mine
proved this a couple of years ago, crunched his Pitts S-1S doing a wheel
landing. I love all the opinions, NO ONE IS WRONG!
Mark W. Dickey
I love it when experts disagree. I can do whatever I want then. :) A Yak 55
doesn't have enough propellor clearance for wheelies take-off or landing. No
decision I guess.