Fwiw, I had the generous opportunity to fly with Tim in his fine Mono a few y
ears back, and didn't notice any strange handling issues - in fact he showed
me two landings to prove it :) I did't get the impression it was any busie
r than a normal taildragger either. Thanks again Tim! I had the same obser
vations on my other three mono demo flights. For sure it would have differen
t techniques with the outriggers than a 'normal' taildragger, but nothing t
hat couldn't be easily learned. Up here in canada, the young air cadets trai
n on gliders without disaster. I for sure will build mine as a mono, as the m
ono's attributes are what attracted me to the plane in the first place, and t
he entire structure is based on the compact and efficient design. For sure i
t is less busy on the ground than my short coupled and inadequate tailed hum
melbird :-)
That said, the tri "gold rush" that is for sale would be the most economical
way to get into a europa (the current north american resale values for euro
pas has plummeted, simply due to their sparse numbers, and fickle NA flyers p
reference to match hole sonex's and RV's).
So far i have not yet flown another type that is so beautifully harmonized, s
table and yet responsive. DD did his homework well! I still love this design
this 19 years after i first did my research.
Cheers and blue skies,
Pete
C-IPWZ (not a europa ;)
> On Apr 1, 2017, at 1:54 PM, Pete Lawless <pete@lawless.info> wrote:
>
> Hi Ira
> I agree totally with Tim. In fact in the last 15 years since my mono has b
een flying I have never noticed any tendency to tip the nose down on braking
regardless of the G of G.
> You just need soft hands on the ailerons to keep the wings level. If you o
ver control and push the outrigger into the surface then it affects the C o
f G, unloads the tail wheel and a ground loop is waiting to happen.
>
> Having owned a share in a Cub I think the mono is neither harder nor easie
r just different.
> Pete
>
> G-RMAC #109
>
>> On 01/04/17 18:15, houlihan tim wrote:
>> Hi Ira
>> "Prop strikes on Mono's are common". What makes you say that ?
>> In the UK there is no noticeable difference between aircraft insurance pr
emiums for tri gear and mono, which tells you something .
>> Sure if you brake hard while turning you can upset things but the acciden
t rate is very similar for both types.
>> I have had my 912 mono classic flying for 15 years now and yes I broke a p
rop ( only once) but as I attempted to land rounding out about ten feet too h
igh I blame the pilot (me) not the configuration , indeed in a similar situa
tion a tri gear would not only have damaged the prop but also the nosewheel.
>> Better pilots than me have described the mono as no more difficult to ope
rate than a piper cub, Having only been a passenger in a cub I cannot give a
n opinion on that.
>> The mono is a tail wheel aeroplane and behaves like one,
>> regards
>> Tim
>> G-BZTH
>>
>>
>>> On 01 April 2017 at 17:30 rampil <ira.rampil@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To further your consideration, the mono wheel also has a spinny thing
>>> on the front end which is absent from most gliders. Prop strikes are als
o
>>> common with monowheels. Depending on you CG loading, a tap on
>>> the brake might just rock you forward! Fortunately (if one can say
>>> that in this context), the combination of carbon fiber prop and
>>> Rotax gear box usually prevents expensive engine damage.
>>>
>>> --------
>>> Ira N224XS
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467914#467914
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> >
>>
>
|