Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Had that happen to me a couple of times in the Yak. Just hung around the airport, making a nuisance of myself 'til everybody got on THEIR radios to talk about me and went in and landed. Not FAA standard procedure, but it worked.
If it's towered you would have been cleared to land via aldis lamps, uncontrolled with traffic i'd be wary in putting her down right away - since a lot of those fools don't even talk on the radio. Did you have a transponder?
I have some excellent hot mike tales .
In a nordo approach wouldn't you just join downwind and hope for the steady green or do a missed approach just to wake the controller up
I measured the undercarriage of our 109 today and and from center to center on the wheelHave you tried to land a Bf-109? Neither have I but I can tell you that a tail dragger with a main landing gear of a narrow track like that of the Bf-109 would make any aircraft difficult to land and take off.
PBfoot, can you comment on that?The myth isn't that the 109 was difficult to land, it's that it was caused by the narrow track undercarriage. As you point out, the F4F had a very narrow track, and no problems with landing. The Spitfire also had a narrow track, and doesn't have the reputation the 109 has.
The problem for the 109 is that the wheels do not point straight ahead when the undercarriage is down. What that means is, when you land, if one wheel touches down before the other, the plane will tend to turn, if the wheel grips properly.
will doIf possible, find out where the CG is on each aircraft. That will also be a determining factor on how "Pilot Friendly" the aircraft will be on the ground.
Its crap the wheels on both aircraft both point basically straight ahead
I measured the undercarriage of our 109 today and and from center to center on the wheel
the 109 back its 75" front 76.5"
you got it just as stated both are toed out and the reason for that escapes me at this point but it was explained but I forgotSo the fronts of the tyres are 76.5 inches apart, and the rear 75 inches? If the fronts are further aprat than the rears, the tyres are not parallel, so cannot be pointing straight ahead.
That's the definition of toe out.
I speaking in terms of where the CG is in relationship to the MLG - the further aft, the less aft fulcrum between the mains, CG and tailwheel...SHouldn't CG be published in the various manuals for the A/C? It's not usually as big a deal like it is for us multis and cargo planes, but they should have a chart for computing??? I even did it before every flight in the T-34C.
I speaking in terms of where the CG is in relationship to the MLG - the further aft, the less aft fulcrum between the mains, CG and tailwheel...
Right, and this would also make it harder to control on the ground.Gotcha. But this should be able to be determined based off the reference datum that the CG is computed from. It would just have to be compared to the station number of the MLG.