When to 3-Point and When to Wheels-Land Your Taildragger 

Completely understand airplane propellers - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hvboi6w1Z9A.html STOL takeoff theory explained - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aJd1xEmbWOU.html

Once a pilot learns to reflexively control tail height by moderating brake pressure, the risk of a nose-over is eliminated, and wheel landings become the safest and best method in any gusty or crosswind situation. In most taildraggers, differential brake steering is far more positive and reliable than either rudder or tailwheel steering, whether the tail is up or down. Whenever rudder and/or tailwheel steering does not immediately accomplish the desired result, the most effective way to exert and maintain precise directional control is to add in some differential brake steering. Learning tail-up braking and controlling tail height with brakes allows pilots to maintain precise control of their taildraggers in practically any wind conditions. Wheel landings offer better visibility of the runway and/or obstacles, better rudder authority prior to touchdown, and the ability to choose exactly when and where to touch down, rather than just waiting (very vulnerably) for the lift to run out, as is the case in every three point landing. After touching down, as rudder authority begins to diminish, differential braking becomes the primary steering method until the tail is let down, which can be as late as the pilot wishes. Adding power to increase elevator authority and tail-up braking to counteract the resulting increased thrust allows pilots to keep the tail up until stopping completely if they wish. The tail can then be let down softly by reducing power. Alternatively, the tail can be let down softly immediately before stopping by applying as much brake pressure as required to prevent it from falling rapidly. For more details and a series of exercises for developing these skills, see “The Art of Avoiding Ground Loops,” available on Amazon.

You're a brave man for wading into this topic! :D I'm an Aviation Medical Examiner in Alaska and I see a lot of pilots, many of whom own and fly taildraggers. I always ask "Wheelies or three-points?" It's a fun poll. Roughly 80% prefer wheel landings and virtually 100% of Part 135 operators prefer them. I've had a few tell me they never allow their pilots to three-point. I own and fly a Cessna 180 and learned to fly it from three very experienced bush pilots. Every one of them taught me to wheel land in all conditions except three-points for short field grass and gravel. I think the three-point comes much more naturally for pilots since almost all of us learn in tricycle gear airplanes ("hold it off, hold it off, more right rudder!"). It takes work to master the wheelie. But those that do generally believe it provides better control through all phases of a landing (and no, using a bit of differential brake to maintain center-line does not cause a nose-over.) Thanks for posting!

Tail has to come down sometime. Might as well start there

Douglas DC-3 in civilian life is wheel landing only, 3-point not permitted. The military C-47 or Dakota does not prohibit 3-point landings but warns of adverse handling characteristic associated with stall and engine drop off. Nice showing a T-6, though. The strange thing about the Texan/SNJ/Harvard is that when facing a nasty crosswind, a 3-point gets you safely on the ground l, tail down l, and airspeed decayed to taxi way better than wheel landing.Sure a wheel landing gets you on the mains and rolling … but sooner later, you have to get the tail down, tail wheel locked and holding the centerline, as you slow. That’s when you’re vulnerable and wishing you hadn’t got it your faith in the wheel landing. The 3-pointed is a misnomer l: you’re really wing-down-into-the-wind and make runway contact with the upwind wheel •and the tail wheel• for longitudinal control! When under control, lower the downwind wheel and roll out straight. Not necessarily the easiest crosswind landing you’ll ever make, to be sure.

FINALLY A DEFINITIVE ANSWER TO WHEN TO USE WHEEL LANDING!!! THANKS!

Brilliantly explained, thank you so much. I'm a tricycle pilot slowly trying to get to grips with taildraggers, this was most helpful.

Well explained. I prefer wheel landing my Stearman for forward visibility reasons. For my Cub, I prefer three point. I found that if I try to land tailwheel first then I get the three point stance every time.

In the old airtractor radial days guys would put geared 1320s with huge dc3 props on them and if you wheel landed them you’d have a bad day.

I am never going to fly a plane. However, I am an engineer and I really enjoyed your concise overview. 😊

Learned to fly 2 different tail draggers, The flying school for the Tiger moth wanted a wheeler, the flying school for the more modern Skyfox type wanted a 3 pointer. The theory if I recall was that the tiger moth needed more airflow over the rudder to as not to try turn itself around and kill you, the Skyfox was more responsive with rudder at lower air speed and so they wanted a 3 pointer and have the tail wheel in control as soon as possible.

The Pitts biplane community generally sticks to 3 point to avoid prop strike on landing. There are people who wheel land a Pitts, however. I was taught 3 point and that's what I always do.

Not production aircraft, but many of the Reno Unlimited race planes need to be both taken off and landed on three points due to prop clearance.

The RV-8 has a reputation for not liking to 3-point except perhaps with aft CG. I ran out of elevator the first time trying to 3-point mine while solo. Most of us wheel them on. Use what works best for you. Know your cross-wind limits and remain within them. The best way to stay out of trouble is to avoid it.

What a great discussion and one I havent ever seen before in a video. What you say makes perfect sense. Three point is my favourite for the cub as it lands a little shorter. But your point about secondary lift off or ballooning is such a valid one. Yes the taildragger should always be 'flown on' and not stalled on in a strong headwind

I've never flown a tail dragger and don't have any plans to fly one but this was very interesting video. I'll keep this in mind in case I fly one.

Good video Thank you! Hope to own a tail dragged some day!

Excellent explanation ... and btw if in doubt the wheel-landing (two point) is the safer one, because some aircraft have the tendency to start jumping out of the three poit attitude. Thanks for the video.

Wheel landing on rough or bumpy/hard grass runways usually leads to the aircraft goes flying again - I prefer 3-point in those conditions. If you could address the runway condition too instead of only focusing on the wind that would be great 😃 thanks for a great video

I have a Courier and my FI told me to never try a 3 point landing with a crosswind, because if youre slow, close to the stall, you have no control over the longitudinal axis, so you cant roll the plane if a gust suddenly wants to push one of your wings up, also the slower you are the lower control you have on your rudder, so moments before touching down and being able to correct using the brakes, the nose of the airplane can aim into the wind because it is pushing way to hard along the tail... Speed means security and assure you have enough roll and yaw control. So i cant agree on using 3 point landings if you have a severe crosswind, better have speed roll into the wind opposite pedal, touch down with one main wheel and keep it until the other wheel touches the ground, keep ailerons deflected and use brakes to maintain the nose straight.

Good coverage of all the variables. Wolfgang, in Stick and Rudder, talks about finishing the touchdown in a three point attitude all slowed up and ready to squat. But he doesn't go into the variables as you do. Because tw airplanes are becoming more expensive and are totalled when ground looped with considerable airspeed, I think we should go back to his advice regardless of technique used to finish. I have alway taught the power/pitch deceleration on short final coming into ground effect technique. If we are in a three point attitude with power (well below Vso in low ground effect) just before touchdown, we are as slow as possible. Now simply levelling the fuselage gives us the wheel landing options you mentioned without enough extra airspeed to total the airplane in a ground loop. Yes, serious gust spread requires an active throttle. We bring the throttle into active and dynamic play as glide angle and rate of descent control when we pitch up to decelerate (with power) enough on short final to get a sink requiring us to bring the throttle into play. Balloon, close throttle and then adjust throttle. Sink, full throttle and then adjust throttle. LOC fatalities, more prevalent than they were mid last century, result from too much airspeed. Driving it on with the wheel landing technique is good wind management, but the extra airspeed is not needed nor is it safe. Get into the three point attitude slow and near the beginning of the runway and then three point or wheel land to your heart's content.

Great video. It's interesting to note that wheel landings transition into a three point position, and at this point you're exposed to the same risks.

Thank you !

I was doing my taildragger training on PZL-104 Wilga, and its AFM clearly says that only 3 point landings are recommended. Great video BTW.

Wheel landings have always been the scariest because sometimes it’s just a sensation that you’re leaned over too far and that you will have a prop strike. My instructor told me to look to the side to see the angle of attack against the horizon. That in itself is scary as soon as you take your eyes off the front of the airplane, you risk the possibility of a ground loop.

I always three point my Stinson 108 because even a wheel landing soon becomes three point and the sooner all wheels are on the ground I feel absolutely in control. One technique I use when I need tail rudder control at low speeds is to input the rudder in the direction I want the nose to turn then momentarily nudge the throttle. Works great even up to 30 knot gusts.

I always, save the tiny wheel!!! :)

The Mosquito was normally wheel landed. If you tried to three point it, the extended flaps would block the air flow to the rudder and a loss of directional control was likely.

During WW2 and before there were only a few aircraft that were regularly wheel landed. The C47 was one but it was a structural reason; when heavily loaded it could bend the fuselage if stalled to high above the runway. Same with the earlier Ford Trimotor. The Corsair was landed in a tail low attitude because of turbulence over the tail at high AoA... EVERY other aircraft manual or instructional, British, US or German , teaches three point landings. Show me one that doesn't, and it will be a rare exception. What's more, none of them show this currently fashionable technique of shoving the stick way forward, forcing the tail up as soon as possible and then violently rotating. I see no benefit in wheel landings whatsoever. The tailwheel steers. It doesn't steer when it's up in the air. In my Maule I never resorted to wheel landings, even in the gustiest crosswind. Racing down the runaway with a crosswind and your tail sticking up takes twice the runway length, higher touchdown speed, less braking , you're more susceptible to side gusts and as you slow down, guess what: you're now in the same position as you would have been had you landed three point in the first place. It's illogical. Whatever perceived benefits there are they are outweighed by the negatives. I think it became fashionable among nosewheel pilots who were (badly) trained to just fly the airplane onto the ground instead of properly flaring. My 2cents. Worth about $2,40.

I had a Bushby Mustang II, which uses a laminar airfoil. The stall characteristics for that plane are sudden with little pre-stall buffet and a sharp wing drop (to the right on mine). That combined with stiff main gear legs meant three point landings were extremely difficult to pull off well. I bounced my way down many runways until I figured out that a wheel landing could help avoid those problems. After that, bounced landings were fairly rare and I greased more landings than I could count. Also, the plane had a naturally aft CG so using the brakes at any point in the landing was never a problem. A Cessna 120, however, will definitely punish you for being too heavy on the brakes at speed (tail up or down).

Quicky Q2 and Q200s cannot wheel land due to their extremely low prop clearance. KR2 struggles immensely with three point landings due to the poor pitch authority at low airspeeds, and will usually tail strike first

Actually one taildragger I have owned that requires wheel landings only is the Pitts Model 12 due to the length of the prop.

Most Pitts 12 pilots will say they should never be wheeled on. The prop clearance is very small. I have known pilots who did it out of ignorance much to the panic of the aircraft owner. The margin is quite small.

I prefer three points landings but a good pilot has to master the two points as well.

Rans S-9 and probably the S-10 can not be wheel-landed. And it is not because of prop-clearance but the wheels are too far in front of the CG so the tail drops down directly when the wheels hit the grond, increasing the alfa and you take off again, usually with a not desired result ...

2:43 My grandfather used to have one of those!

There is no universal recipe. It’s not “paint-by-numbers.” Wheel landings are possible, but discouraged in the Extra, for example. Most pilots breaking the main gear in Extras are dicking around with wheel landings. The Extra handles big crosswinds pretty well in the three-point attitude and there is a much lower chance of side-loading the gear.

Pitts model 12...3 point only

Sukhois cannot be two pointed for both landing and takeoff due to the very little prop clearance they have…

It all depends on wind velocity and direction.

DC-3 was mains first and threepoint was discouraged, no?

Europa mono wheel can't be wheeler landed

Im able to do both interchangeably. And..... fight!

PITTS model-12 only 3 point. You don’t even run it on the mains during take off. Pretty sure the prop clearance isn’t great

The terminology of this is interesting. "3 point" is obvious and intuitive; you're touching at 3 points simultaneously. Why not call the other a "2 point" landing??

I wheel just to protect my tiny tailwheel as much as I can.

Don't forget the go around ....

The US ARMY AR FORT RUCKER ALABAMA ONLY TOUGHT FULL STALL 3 POINT LANDINGS

The rear parachute will save you from a somersault

G109b POH says 3 point only.

The object of landing is facilitated by the absence of energy used to produce lift. Their for landing with with more energy than less is counter productive. In my 40 years of flying tail draggers there is not one valid argument I've heard for not landing three point.

Dc3 can’t be 3-pointed either. It has a locking tailwheel so you can’t steer it. Also once the tail is lowered you lose all rudder authority. Many dc3s have been ran off the runway due to this. Lower the tail and you lose all ability to steer the plane

It’s “wheel landing” not “wheels landing.”