Landings.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

It would be interesting to see what type of landings tail wheel pilots here prefer and why they prefer them.

Me , I almost always wheel land them because I have better control of the landings that way....and it is easier.

[Nark]

Almost word for word the same: wheel landings.
I have more directional control all the way until I choose to let the tail down.

It makes for easy transition to x-wind landing.

Plus there is nothing sexier than a rudder flapping back and forth on a windy day while you drive down the runway straight as an arrow. (the weapon, not the venable trainer from Piper)

[Slick Goodlin]

I almost always three-point, but I also fly light floaty stuff that was designed to land that way. My tailwheel instructor, a very well respected and accomplished aerobatic pilot, said “You’re going to end up on three points anyways, may as well start there.”

On the other hand, the Cornell wants to be wheeled on and I have no doubt many other airplanes just work better that way too.

[Liquid_Charlie]

Once I discovered "wheel landings" and even back then schools did not acknowledge them or train them. We had a guy with a super cub that came into brampton all the time, he owned a super cub so god status in 1962 was immediate -- haha -- he "wheeled it on" and obviously was subject of many conversations and I decided I liked it and tried wheel landings in my lowly J3 ( it wasn't so lowly, 90hp grasshopper newly complete overhaul with new bag) and I liked it and it felt better.

Fast forward to today and I bumped into a guy on youtube. He is hard core off strip and still opts for wheel landings on gravel bars and all short strips arguing that he would rather trade landing distance for cockpit viability and aircraft control that one gives up with high nose and very low speed control ability. He says that style is best left for STOL completions and not in the off strip world.

I completely agree with him.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I tend to 3 point the small tail draggers and wheel land the bigger ones like 185’s and larger. However I found the Airtractor 802 easier to 3 point than wheel land.

[cgzro]

I don't have a hard and fast rule. What I've found is that some planes really love 2 points and some really love 3 points and some really don't seem to care. So I just adapt to the plane, my mood, the runway and the weather. The Pitts can do both without problem and 2 points are good with a strong cross wind or if you just want to show off. Sometimes tailwheels have shimmy in which case a 2 pointer will usually lessen the time it's in that shimmy mode.

In general though I can make a much smoother landing 2 point than I can three point so with a passenger I will often 2 point when I want to really grease it on. The Fox Moth is one example where you don't want to scare the poor person in the cabin and a nice wheelie is usually best on pavement.

The Extra is unusual in that the tail wheel will touch considerably before the mains in a three point, so you need to check your flair angle to avoid it and the larger than necessary drop that ensues onto the mains. It kind of sits on all three while still flying if you do it perfectly, at least the 330LT.

So no real rules .. just adapting to the situation as required.

[Colonel]

Taildragger wheel landing vs three point is like boxers vs tighty whities.

No one can tell you, what feels best to you. I'm not sure it really matters
much what style of underwear you prefer, or which landing style suits you
best.

I know people don't much like taildraggers any more, but one advantage
is that it doesn't really matter how fast you approach a taildragger. Vne
over the runway threshold is fine - just wheel it on.

See, with a nosewheel aircraft, if you approach too fast, the nose is going
to dig down and you're going to float forever, waiting to slow down before
you can touch down on the mains first.

With a taildragger, you can land out of a surface loop. Try that in a 172.

The crowd seemed to think it was cool to land out of a loop or 1/2 reverse
cuban-8 entered at the surface, depending upon whether or not you wanted
a direction reversal.

Pro Tip™: you don't actually need brakes on a little airplane, except for
the runup (do you really need a runup?) and turning out of a strong wind
while taxiing. If one brake is flat, use the other brake and do a 270 the
other direction.

If brakes were a good idea, they'd put them on straight floats. Actually,
when you land straight floats on pavement, the very last thing you need
is more braking. You will be amazed how short your rollout is, and how
little damage you just did.

[digits]

And a wheel plane that lands on water without brakes also comes to a stop *really* quickly!

[Chuck Ellsworth]

I never could figure out why anyone would want to water ski a wheel equipped airplane.

[Liquid_Charlie]

And a wheel plane that lands on water without brakes also comes to a stop *really* quickly!

I have seen discussions that might make that statement untrue-

I have never done it but continuing a takeoff on the ice after running out of water. Landing on land with floats at change over I have done many times. That was pretty uneventful the fun and interesting events were the dolly takeoffs in the spring.