A few things. I really like the Top Rudder Solo and it’s a blast to fly low for sightseeing.
Remember the prop is on a clutch with the Solo. Pull throttle back enough and the motor is no longer connected to the prop. It freewheels. So no need to kill the engine on approach. In real life you always want the ability to add power to stretch glides, avoid unexpected hazards, go around if need be, etc.
That three point landing stance is for good reason. You want the wing to stall very quickly after touching down so the transition from flying to rolling on wheels happens fast and you have good traction on the ground. Taildraggers have an inherent problem in that the mains are ahead of the CG and they are happy to swap those for you. You want to transition from on the ground to in the air smoothly and quickly and the same for during landing.
As others noted, hitting tailwheel first means no more pulling back on the stick to stop descent. When that tailwheel hits, the wing’s angle of incidence to the apparent wind can’t increase and the rest of the plane falls out of the sky and the mains take the brunt. You always fly the plane down and the Solo is fun because with any wind, it also teaches you you are actually flying until you come to a full stop.
There is a very cool video ultralight on youtube. Honestly, the solo 103 is what has been missing from MSFS. All this auto-pilot hold-my-hand flying is just boring. People literally post on reddit how they pop in auto-pilot, go to bed and come back next morning. I mean what is the point? If they were at least sitting it out for 8 hours, that would be a little bit respectable. People ask for the next Airbus or whatnot to fly it. There is no flying there! The airbus can complete a full flight on its own. The solo 103 is flying! You do something. Especially if you do orientation challenges or turn point challenges or try to cross mountain ranges in wind or all three combined.
You need to remember that in older sims flying VFR with the dodgy scenery got pretty boring as it was just more of the same over and over, so what kept it interesting was learning all the complex procedures to fly airliners.
MSFS is the exact opposite, the airliner stuff is poorly implemented and pretty boring but the VFR GA flying all over the world is just amazing.
Yes, I too believe, that is it. What I am wondering though is why even use MSFS if you do a IFR flight at huge altitude? Literally all selling points of MSFS over the ‘older’ simulator can be found in VFR/low&slow. MSFS offers no advantage at all for airliners IFR.
Going low&slow opens up a whole new world however that was not there before. I can literally do turnpoint challenges like in X-Alps with the solo 103. Yesterday I did Grenoble to Alpe de Huez with wind coming from SO15kts, with mandatory running-touchdown turnpoint in a valley. Turnpoint races are the best. The strategic route planning to stay in updrafts/luv and overall hands-on flying are the BEST! As soon as they include thermals in the sim, I am going to mod a paraglider.
Absolutely. I love A2A‘s Cub and T6 but flying them in P3D lost its thrill. I certainly like to manage the systems of an A320 or a 747 but I don‘t need MSFS for that. I won‘t probably even repurchase these addons for MSFS, I can use P3D for them without losing anything. This sim (MSFS) is so meant to be flown low and slow. I had the FBW A320, flew it twice and found that it‘s pointless to cruise at 36000ft just to land at a boring default airport. So I would have to repurchase all the big airports I have in P3D for that 3 minutes of visual joy. No, I rather use all those small freeware airfields and grab the P149 or one of the Cubs and have fun instead of hours of watching the system fly (and eventually end up with 4x sim rate lol)
This is a great video, last 20 seconds or show really show the landing in super clear detail. I will say I think this is their higher weight aircraft (ruckus) that doesn’t meet the 103 requirements, but assuming the landing technique is essentially similar.
The solo can even be ‘driven’ at full speed - that’s how good the landing is. Not sure if this is possible in real life as well. Anyways, I use it as a turnpoint requirement for ‘on the ground’ checkpoints during turnpoint races. https://streamable.com/q9gkpw
On a side note, the transparent top is also very useful when taking it to autogen NY.
This little aircraft has just the right speed. I actually googled the price, it is like 25k. Perfectly fine. I do not know why MS pays license fees. This is the perfect advertisment. I mean I am ready to hand over the 25k like RIGHT NOW!!! https://streamable.com/rd3a6e
This „driving“ can be done in reality too, that‘s basically what you see in all those bushflying videos on youtube where people „drive“ their bushplanes over water. You just don‘t want to do that in windy conditions or with obstacles ahead. Always keep in mind in single engine aircraft: altitude is speed is life.
The great thing with these kind of aircraft is that they have a lot of drag, so you can lose a lot of altitude (energy) in a short distance and the great lift makes very short landing and takeoff distances so even if you lose the engine (at altitude) you‘re quite safe. The downside is the little weight, so turbulence next to trees or hangars have a strong effect on the plane and you really have to be prepared.
Heh, I was tearing around downtown San Francisco earlier today and it was very blustery with gusts coming up between the buildings. Almost smashed myself into a few skyscrapers. Definitely best for calm days…
(I would be much more modest and careful if I ever get a chance to fly one of these for real, I swear! )
I would be so careful, I would not fly it at all unless I am trained by a really old experienced guy. If some middle-aged guy showed up, all fancy and hyped about his new start-up plane and the present me the solo 103, I would bail like there is no tomorrow. I mean, in the US you can just buy one, hop in and try your luck. Just like this, just like buying a bicycle. That’s how relaxed the regulations are. I do not know, I am a really careful guy. My calculation would be like:
Pro: some sensation/adrenaline
Neutral: sitting in a chair, holding a stick
Con: potential death
Not sure, unless the most experienced flight instructor trained me, I would always resort to a VR headset or ride a rollercoaster in real life. I am just too scared about everything. The thought of loosing control and hammering me into the ground or into some trees at 60mph, phew, not for me
Here is a nice video, where they discuss lots of things, also landing. The old guy, he is the only instructor I would trust.
This is a real life problem with no camera unless you’ve got lindburghs periscope. You’ve got to swivel down the taxiway to see ahead thru the edge of the windscreen.
Flies quite easy for a tail dragger ! One thing I noticed during takeoff, you gotta postpone de-activating flaps (Control slash back) until it has gained some height. That way it is much easier to keep it straight after takeoff. Landing: like Cessna Bird dog, I fly in low and take back throttle on approach, but not all throttle. Especially for this one, you can turn back throttle a long way, it has a very nice continuous control over low throttle. Fly in nice and slow, no flaps are needed to slow it down for landing. Keep the nose up a little, to get to horizontal, you land either on 3 wheels (best) or gently on the tail wheel. I would still say: avoid to land this one or any tail dragger too steep. No need to force elevator downward while landing.. avoid hops, any tail dragger has issues with hops. Just approach low, take back throttle, let it gently glide out. Breaks work good also, CG is ok, no forward tilting. Taxiing out after landing is easier than any tail dragger I ever tried in MSFS.
Great work ! balance is good. And a perfect view outside. Very happy with my purchase. When it’s so easy and when it works realistic (I dont know.. of course) I may consider buying one in RL and fly around !
Going back to the original quesion - landing a Solo 103 - I used to own and fly my own microlight (ultralight), back in the 1980s. The engine was a Rotax 447; about 40hp and reliable if not mistreated (i.e. don’t exceed max rpm, don’t exceed max cht, don’t stay within 25C of max cht for more than a minute).
The way I was taught to land was how I always landed it, and it was this:
Fly at circuit height until I’m at the point where an engine failure means I would land where I wanted to.
Lower the nose, let the speed build up to approach speed, which was at least 5 knots faster than cruise speed (yes, really)
Cut the power to idle.
Fly the approach with engine at idle at the approach speed, and at the correct height, transition into a flare, ideally ending up about a couple of feet over the runway, and then hold the attitude and let the aircraft settle gently on the runway. The extra speed gave me the control authority to transition into the flare and then hold-off,
The other way I land the Solo 103 is if I want to do a short field landing, and that is to fly the approach at 35 knots using power and attitude as required, and then flare and reduce power. I wouldn’t do that in a real aircraft as an engine failure at say 100’ flying that slowly will almost certainly result in a nasty crash as there wouldn’t be sufficient height to recover from the incipient stall.
Definitely best for calm days…
