I think both sides are becoming a bit emotional on the subject.
My own experience dictated that I build a tri-gear. I bought my kit, as
a mono, from a guy who had purchased it 4 years prior and never started
it. Lucky me as the price was right. Before buying, however, I flew a
mono, with John Hurst, in Lakeland. In the air it was pure art. On the
ground, on pavement, it just plane sucked. Had nothing to so with
landing or take-offs. It just handled terribly on the pavement.
Incidently, John had the same impression. Now, because most of my
flying was to be from paved runways, it was a no brainer for me. "But
Jeff", you say, "you're based at a grass strip". True, however that
came about after the build was finished and, besides, that strip serves
three puropses; first takeoff, last landing and storage. Like I said,
most of my flying is from paved strips and it is. I realize that the
mono, with its larger wheel, is better suited for rough terrain, but the
tri-gear, even with a speed kit, does just fine on less that smooth
grass surfaces. Add to that, the less complex mechanism and that sewed
it up, for me.
Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not bashing the mono. It is a
beautiful bird and a bit faster, than its "small wheel up front" sister,
though not enough to make any real difference to me. I believe the
problem, here is, "defence of your own". We're all guilty of it. Fact
is, though, whether you fly a mono or a trike, you have one of the
finest homebuilts in the sky. It is one of the most unique aircraft
that I've seen, anywhere. Attending as many fly-ins as I do, "Baby
Blue" has been the talk of them all. Oh, and BTW, at every gathering
she's attended, she's been dubbed "sexy". ;)
So, guys, argue til you're blue in the face. Fact remains, the Europa,
in any flavor, is fun, economical and shear joy to fly. So stop beating
your chests and go enjoy your birds... ;)
Jeff - N55XS
109 hours and grinning more, every day...
Mike Parkin wrote:
>
> Trying to remain unemotional and logical !!!!!!!!
>
> You are obviously a late comer to the Europa fraternity, when many of us
> started building - training wheels/stabilisers were not an option.
>
>
>>I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen
>>the
>>mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely zero
>>performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise speed, in
>>fuel burn, or whatever.
>
>
> With respect this statement is complete unadulterated rubbish!! Ask Andy
> Draper why on X-country they always flew with the tri-gear fuel state in
> mind. Answer - it always ran out of fuel before the monowheel. I have yet
> to fly with a tri-gear that can out climb or out cruise my monowheel.
>
> The difference is that the mono is inheritantly
>
>>unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost) else
>>in
>>the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the taildragger
>>design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life of me
>>I
>>cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the rest of
>>the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the results.
>>Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props, running
>>off
>>the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity. Perhaps
>>that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that
>>requires
>>regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not
>>impressed.
>
>
> The original design concept was to produce an aircraft that could operate
> from an short, unprepared farm strip. The same aircraft should be able to
> cover distance at a good speed and be kept at home on a trailer - avoiding
> hangarage costs. Ivan achieved all those points with style - it is fact
> that experience has shown that a monowheel can be operated from some strips
> that would be a no-go with a tri-gear.
> It is true that if it is mis-handled, the monowheel is likely to bite back.
> I have only witnessed one major Europa incident and that was a tri-gear that
> entered into a PIO and wiped out the prop and the nosewheel on the third
> bounce - fortunately the crew walked away unharmed.
>
>
>>I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a certain
>>thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love the
>>challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for good
>>chest
>>thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest that
>>you
>>take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer and more
>>satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up the
>>ranks,
>>but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an unstable
>>design over a proper one.
>
>
> A wild and unpredictable beast -- oh pleeeease !!!! all it requires is
> average skill and a little practice. Thats why people choose to fly a Pitts
> or an RV - or perhaps the ultimate a Mustang or a Spitfire. If all you want
> is a safe aircraft, then why not stick with a wallowing SpamCan.
>
> Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air, but
>
>>one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts like a
>>drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and unemotional
>>arguments in favor of the mono.
>>
>>Trigear pilot
>
>
> You may be right in what you say, but as someone else commented - a
> monowheel in flight looks sexy. Have you ever tried handling a monowheel or
> do you just criticise from a distance.
>
>
> signed Monowheel Pilot (Slightly twisted, living on the edge with
> absolutely no sense at all - BUT IT IS FUN!!)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|