At 11:11 AM 2/20/2014, you wrote: >The slower the better in an emergency. On the mains is not as slow >as three point. I know this is going to bring up a big debate. But >as Mark says when you need to get stop fast there's only one way to do it. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Nothing really here to debate. In an emergency, the slower the better and I'd probably even touch tail wheel first in an off airport landing in unfriendly terrain. But, in a non-emergency situation, I feel I have better control and better visibility doing a tail low wheel landing. We're not talking a big difference in speed here, maybe 5 mph or less at actual touchdown. If I were flying a Cessna 150, I wouldn't be dragging it in with power and full flaps, making a short or soft field landing on every approach, just in case I need to make that type of approach someday. In my KR, the three point attitude blocks all forward vision so I can't even judge my height above the runway. I get the feeling I'm just along for the ride the last few seconds before touchdown. In a tail low wheel landing I have visibility over the nose until I'm under flying speed and can quickly recognize and stop any drift in a crosswind. It really is no different than the approach and touchdown of a tri-gear airplane. The only difference is my tail goes down as I slow and their's goes up as they slow. If the three point touchdown were the only acceptable way to land a KR, the tri-gear pilots would be dragging their tails on touchdown. Just a thought. Each aircraft has it's own handling requirements and should be flown accordingly, given the variables of each flight. Personally, I can't recall ever seeing DC3's, B17's, and the like making three point landings. Go with what makes you feel good......... Larry Flesner
