Another tailwheel discussion

[jrevens]

Ok, so again, this is why this my point about maule tailwheels is so hard to get across. I specifically said that I know some have had really good luck with them. But others haven't been so lucky.

Pilots have had bad luck with every kind of tailwheel made. I was always a great fan of the Scott 6" wheel (34B/2000), but I had one bite me once when it unlocked on takeoff roll with a strong crosswind. The tailwheel was worn out and I was stupid for not paying enough attention while exercising my superior piloting skills. The Maule will not unlock when you don't want it to if it isn't worn out & if it is set up properly. By set up properly, I mean that full rudder deflection doesn't make the wheel reach the angle where it releases, and it requires sideways force to move it a small amount further to the unlocking point. On some airplanes that might not be possible without changing the amount of rudder travel or the control arm lengths on either the rudder or the wheel. You need to be set up so that you do not reach that break-free angle with full rudder deflection. If you get a bad wheel that doesn't break at the same angle each time, then you should rebuild it or return it for a good one. The Aviation Products tailwheel, as it comes from the factory, breaks at too small an angle for my set-up, so I machined the groove that the locking key runs in a little larger, increasing that angle. I don't care for the Maule because I think that the quality of manufacturing has not always been good... that is my opinion. The one that failed during the fatal accident with Ken Brock broke apart - the arm that the axle is attached to broke. I have heard that they may have had some bad parts at some particular time. Additionally, the wheel is kind of heavy & hunky. Again, that is just my opinion. I'm not trying to belittle anyone's abilities as a pilot, but you have to monitor it's condition, be aware of how the wheel works and set it up properly, whatever that takes.