Luscombe

[QUOTE=Janie]Thanks AF. I confess I lied in my profile. I wasn’t really born in 1903. But I am younger than you! Hurrah!
QUOTE]
Time has just been kinder to me……………….!! 😀

Thanks AF. I confess I lied in my profile. I wasn’t really born in 1903. But I am younger than you! Hurrah!

I just hope that because Luscombes “look good” IYHO, will make it much easier to land.
Hmmm.

I must confess that they always look good IMHO (which could be construed as heresy from an Auster fan and general supporter of all things ancient and British – that’s why I like Janie so much……….!!!!!!!! :dev2: 😀 ).

for some reason they did acquire an undeserved reputation as being ‘hot ships’ and tricky to handle.

I know of two reasons for this at the moment:

Firstly, there was a phase, years ago, when Luscombes were first introduced into the UK, where relatively new nosewheel pilots were buying them unaware that they had to have faster reflexes in their feet. Secondly, the tailwheel has the characteristic whereby it will travel a few degrees off centre, but if it “breaks out” it moves into the tight-turn mode and will pivot you off around.

If you keep it straight, it should be OK.

Thanks for your views, Propstrike.

Not bad at all, those Luscombes, and good value too, especially the metal ones, which can live outside. My initial recollection of them is the relatively poor view , a little bit like peering out of a letter box. I think they all have control columns (so much nicer) rather than yokes.

Handling in the air is very pleasant, and not really a problem on the ground, though for some reason they did acquire an undeserved reputation as being ‘hot ships’ and tricky to handle. After a Cessna 150/172, for instance, they do feel a bit more lively, and like any tail-wheel a/c, they have the potential to ground-loop, especially in a crosswind, but for a competent pilot, who knows what the rudder does, there should be no real problems.